Lympany 1968

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   34  0.6542  0.0038  0.0642  0.0642  0.0649  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   25  0.6757  0.0024  0.1022  0.4042  0.0817  0.18
Beliavsky 2004   49  0.6222  0.0047  0.0458  0.0445  0.0559  0.04
BenOr 1989   2  0.7511  0.002  0.432  0.7432  0.147  0.32
Biret 1990   16  0.6912  0.0025  0.1117  0.4346  0.0626  0.16
Blet 2003   3  0.743  0.023  0.323  0.716  0.671  0.69
Block 1995   12  0.6915  0.0026  0.1320  0.4039  0.0816  0.18
Brailowsky 1960   40  0.6436  0.0044  0.0549  0.0525  0.4028  0.14
Chiu 1999   41  0.6429  0.0036  0.0552  0.0547  0.0655  0.05
Clidat 1994   20  0.6816  0.0023  0.0816  0.4354  0.0432  0.13
Cohen 1997   59  0.5930  0.0056  0.0554  0.0520  0.2834  0.12
Coop 1987   17  0.6953  0.0014  0.0910  0.5037  0.0912  0.21
Cortot 1951   38  0.6546  0.0051  0.0646  0.0624  0.3330  0.14
Czerny 1949   36  0.6563  0.0039  0.0640  0.0649  0.0648  0.06
Czerny 1949b   50  0.6155  0.0052  0.0547  0.0553  0.0656  0.05
Ezaki 2006   23  0.6841  0.0032  0.0732  0.1338  0.1035  0.11
Falvay 1989   4  0.726  0.017  0.215  0.6137  0.109  0.25
Ferenczy 1958   47  0.6264  0.0054  0.0641  0.0638  0.0746  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   19  0.6866  0.0021  0.0718  0.4349  0.0625  0.16
Fliere 1977   18  0.6845  0.0022  0.1021  0.4034  0.0913  0.19
Fou 1978   44  0.6465  0.0041  0.0933  0.0954  0.0541  0.07
Francois 1956   60  0.572  0.0360  0.0460  0.0422  0.3039  0.11
Hatto 1997   32  0.6533  0.0042  0.0735  0.0744  0.0645  0.06
Horowitz 1971   31  0.665  0.0119  0.0825  0.3610  0.534  0.44
Horowitz 1985   61  0.5256  0.0063  0.0644  0.0637  0.0840  0.07
Indjic 2001   24  0.6727  0.0033  0.0734  0.0749  0.0651  0.06
Kapell 1951   9  0.7026  0.008  0.176  0.5847  0.0614  0.19
Kiepura 1999   46  0.6334  0.0055  0.0551  0.0553  0.0552  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   42  0.6425  0.0035  0.0645  0.0649  0.0647  0.06
Kissin 1993   8  0.7019  0.006  0.267  0.5757  0.0520  0.17
Kitain 1937   63  0.4644  0.0062  0.0462  0.0420  0.3038  0.11
Kushner 1990   39  0.647  0.0130  0.0830  0.1739  0.0833  0.12
Levy 1951   51  0.6139  0.0046  0.0639  0.0639  0.0643  0.06
Luisada 1990   43  0.6450  0.0053  0.0636  0.0645  0.0842  0.07
Lushtak 2004   6  0.7113  0.005  0.228  0.5516  0.433  0.49
Lympany 1968   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Magaloff 1977   55  0.6058  0.0057  0.0550  0.0563  0.0361  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   57  0.5940  0.0058  0.0461  0.0458  0.0463  0.04
Magin 1975   28  0.6635  0.0037  0.0643  0.0647  0.0744  0.06
Milkina 1970   10  0.6924  0.0020  0.0727  0.3139  0.0727  0.15
Mohovich 1999   5  0.718  0.014  0.274  0.6914  0.552  0.62
Nadelmann 1956   22  0.6843  0.0012  0.0713  0.4545  0.0623  0.16
Ohlsson 1999   52  0.6128  0.0050  0.0459  0.0457  0.0460  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   13  0.6947  0.0017  0.0914  0.4544  0.0715  0.18
Olejniczak 1991   30  0.6648  0.0029  0.0928  0.2836  0.1018  0.17
Osinska 1989   7  0.7032  0.0010  0.139  0.5238  0.0910  0.22
Paderewski 1912   54  0.6049  0.0048  0.0548  0.0548  0.0658  0.05
Perahia 1994   58  0.5920  0.0045  0.0638  0.0627  0.2037  0.11
Perlemuter 1986   27  0.679  0.0127  0.0926  0.3416  0.505  0.41
Poblocka 1999   11  0.6910  0.0016  0.0819  0.4144  0.0622  0.16
Rangell 2001   15  0.6931  0.0013  0.0712  0.4849  0.0621  0.17
Risler 1920   62  0.5162  0.0061  0.0363  0.0359  0.0465  0.03
Rosen 1989   56  0.5923  0.0059  0.0556  0.0535  0.0850  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   53  0.614  0.0143  0.0553  0.0521  0.3331  0.13
Rubinstein 1952   26  0.6717  0.009  0.1311  0.4825  0.236  0.33
Rubinstein 1966   37  0.6554  0.0040  0.0637  0.0648  0.0557  0.05
Rummel 1943   48  0.6251  0.0031  0.0731  0.1313  0.3711  0.22
Shebanova 2002   14  0.6921  0.0015  0.0915  0.4552  0.0624  0.16
Smith 1975   29  0.6638  0.0028  0.1129  0.2649  0.0536  0.11
Szpilman 1948   35  0.6514  0.0034  0.0457  0.0442  0.0754  0.05
Uninsky 1971   33  0.6518  0.0011  0.0724  0.3747  0.0529  0.14
Wasowski 1980   45  0.6460  0.0049  0.0555  0.0551  0.0653  0.05
Weissenberg 1971   21  0.6859  0.0018  0.0723  0.3945  0.0719  0.17
Average   1  0.801  0.821  0.801  0.8741  0.088  0.26
Random 1    65  -0.0261  0.0065  0.0265  0.0236  0.0566  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0152  0.0064  0.0364  0.0338  0.0562  0.04
Random 3   66  -0.0337  0.0066  0.0166  0.0128  0.1464  0.04
Note: To load data table give above into Excel, copy and paste the data into a text editor (such as WordPad) first, then copy the text in the editor and past into Excel. You should remove the "target" line from the data before pasting into Excel so that plotting graphs of the data is done properly.

Column descriptions

  • Performance:
  • 0-Rank/0-Score: 0-Score is equivalent to Pearson correlation of the entire data sequence between the reference performance and a test performance. 0-Rank is the sorting order of the 0-scores (highest score has a rank of 1).
  • 1-Rank/1-Score: 1-Score is the area fraction covered by a particular performance in the scape plot (see image above). These values should not be taken literally, since they are sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 2-Rank/2-Score: 2-Score values are equivalent to 1-Score values with all higher-ranking performances removed before the calculation of the area of coverage in the scape is calculated. Improvment over the 1-Rank scores, but still somewhat sensitive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 3-Rank/3-Score: Similar to 2-Rank calculations. The bottom 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are kept constant as a noise floor for the similarity measurement. Then one-by-one the top 1/2 of the 2-rank performances are superimposed with the noise-floor performances, and a 3-score is measured as the area covered in the scape. This measure is not sentisive to the Hatto Effect.
  • 3R-Rank/3R-Score: Reverse 3-rank/3-scores. 3-rankings and scores are not symmetric (A->B values are different from B->A values). So this column represents similarity measures in the opposite direction.
  • 4-Rank/4-Score: The geometric mean between 3-scores and 3R-scores. This column gives the best overall similarity ranking between the various performances (see color codes below).
  • NED: Noise Equivalient Distance (not yet implemented)

Color codes for 3-rank listings:

  • red = strongly similar performance to target
  • orange = moderately similar performance
  • yellow = weakly similar performance
  • green = marginally similar/dissimilar performance
  • white = dissimilar to target
  • blue = false positive (has high 3-rank score but low 3R-rank score)

3-rank/scores are not symmetric, so the 3R-rank/score columns give the 3-rank/scores going in the opposite direction. More matches in the 3-rank column than in the 3R-rank column indicates an individualistic performance, while more matches in the 3R-rank column indicates a mainstream performance.

If a 3-rank and a 3R-rank are both marked as similar to each other, then there is a possible direct relation between the performances. If one is similar to the other but not in the reverse direction, then the similarity is more likely to be by chance (performers randomly chose a similar interpretation).