Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   41  0.6742  0.0045  0.0844  0.0835  0.0746  0.07
Ashkenazy 1981   13  0.8019  0.0019  0.164  0.704  0.675  0.68
Beliavsky 2004   50  0.6431  0.0048  0.0558  0.0549  0.0554  0.05
BenOr 1989   14  0.8024  0.0018  0.159  0.6715  0.4722  0.56
Biret 1990   30  0.7348  0.0029  0.1630  0.4521  0.4030  0.42
Blet 2003   34  0.7016  0.0136  0.0941  0.0919  0.2935  0.16
Block 1995   20  0.7812  0.0123  0.1620  0.584  0.6316  0.60
Brailowsky 1960   48  0.6530  0.0049  0.0552  0.0533  0.1341  0.08
Chiu 1999   18  0.7933  0.0012  0.1525  0.5512  0.5820  0.56
Clidat 1994   35  0.7061  0.0037  0.1037  0.1050  0.0545  0.07
Cohen 1997   60  0.5547  0.0063  0.0650  0.0653  0.0457  0.05
Coop 1987   11  0.8043  0.009  0.1217  0.6214  0.5219  0.57
Cortot 1951   44  0.6627  0.0052  0.0649  0.0632  0.2039  0.11
Czerny 1949   22  0.7721  0.0010  0.1315  0.636  0.718  0.67
Czerny 1949b   25  0.7613  0.0114  0.1118  0.626  0.719  0.66
Ezaki 2006   2  0.8410  0.013  0.216  0.697  0.674  0.68
Falvay 1989   6  0.8120  0.0016  0.1214  0.637  0.6612  0.64
Ferenczy 1958   57  0.5955  0.0056  0.0557  0.0537  0.0751  0.06
Fiorentino 1962   15  0.8015  0.0113  0.1510  0.676  0.743  0.70
Fliere 1977   21  0.7734  0.0024  0.1922  0.5714  0.4925  0.53
Fou 1978   10  0.809  0.0115  0.138  0.687  0.6310  0.65
Francois 1956   62  0.5254  0.0061  0.0461  0.0459  0.0464  0.04
Hatto 1997   45  0.6664  0.0047  0.0554  0.0553  0.0556  0.05
Horowitz 1971   53  0.6339  0.0050  0.0551  0.0531  0.1444  0.08
Horowitz 1985   59  0.5541  0.0058  0.0460  0.0450  0.0558  0.04
Indjic 2001   40  0.6756  0.0046  0.0942  0.0954  0.0548  0.07
Kapell 1951   12  0.8014  0.0111  0.1119  0.5913  0.5421  0.56
Kiepura 1999   24  0.774  0.0326  0.1623  0.572  0.796  0.67
Kilenyi 1937   9  0.8122  0.005  0.247  0.695  0.667  0.67
Kissin 1993   19  0.7918  0.0017  0.1311  0.6712  0.4524  0.55
Kitain 1937   63  0.4032  0.0062  0.0463  0.0455  0.0463  0.04
Kushner 1990   42  0.6765  0.0042  0.0843  0.0832  0.1737  0.12
Levy 1951   47  0.6553  0.0038  0.1038  0.1031  0.1238  0.11
Luisada 1990   17  0.798  0.0121  0.1721  0.574  0.5918  0.58
Lushtak 2004   33  0.7225  0.0035  0.1433  0.1424  0.3134  0.21
Lympany 1968   43  0.6646  0.0044  0.0747  0.0743  0.0650  0.06
Magaloff 1977   26  0.7544  0.0025  0.1527  0.4912  0.4827  0.48
Magaloff 1977b   27  0.7459  0.0027  0.1328  0.4819  0.4328  0.45
Magin 1975   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Milkina 1970   46  0.6660  0.0057  0.0746  0.0757  0.0453  0.05
Mohovich 1999   37  0.6926  0.0041  0.1234  0.1233  0.0740  0.09
Nadelmann 1956   32  0.7217  0.0031  0.1131  0.259  0.4731  0.34
Ohlsson 1999   23  0.773  0.0422  0.2016  0.634  0.6811  0.65
Olejniczac 1990   5  0.8123  0.007  0.185  0.705  0.762  0.73
Olejniczak 1991   3  0.8311  0.012  0.232  0.744  0.791  0.76
Osinska 1989   7  0.817  0.028  0.153  0.7315  0.5113  0.61
Paderewski 1912   54  0.6345  0.0043  0.0845  0.0841  0.0747  0.07
Perahia 1994   61  0.5457  0.0060  0.0553  0.0561  0.0462  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   55  0.6238  0.0054  0.0555  0.0554  0.0555  0.05
Poblocka 1999   4  0.825  0.024  0.1913  0.6412  0.5814  0.61
Rangell 2001   16  0.7935  0.0020  0.1724  0.568  0.5723  0.56
Risler 1920   49  0.6558  0.0032  0.1132  0.2019  0.4432  0.30
Rosen 1989   52  0.6328  0.0053  0.0748  0.0734  0.1043  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   58  0.5740  0.0059  0.0459  0.0447  0.0559  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   36  0.6929  0.0039  0.0939  0.0942  0.0549  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   51  0.6449  0.0055  0.0462  0.0459  0.0460  0.04
Rummel 1943   56  0.6237  0.0051  0.0556  0.0537  0.0752  0.06
Shebanova 2002   28  0.746  0.0230  0.2526  0.5014  0.4726  0.48
Smith 1975   38  0.6863  0.0040  0.1136  0.1147  0.0642  0.08
Szpilman 1948   39  0.6850  0.0033  0.0940  0.0926  0.2636  0.15
Uninsky 1971   29  0.7351  0.0028  0.1029  0.4722  0.4129  0.44
Wasowski 1980   31  0.7336  0.0034  0.1135  0.1121  0.3933  0.21
Weissenberg 1971   8  0.812  0.066  0.2212  0.6410  0.5517  0.59
Average   1  0.871  0.701  0.691  0.9120  0.4015  0.60
Random 1    65  -0.0362  0.0065  0.0265  0.0252  0.0465  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0252  0.0064  0.0464  0.0439  0.0561  0.04
Random 3   66  -0.0566  0.0066  0.0166  0.0155  0.0366  0.02

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).