Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   46  0.6025  0.0047  0.0646  0.0632  0.0945  0.07
Ashkenazy 1981   11  0.6863  0.0013  0.0916  0.3840  0.0821  0.17
Beliavsky 2004   32  0.6533  0.0032  0.0732  0.1316  0.3316  0.21
BenOr 1989   21  0.6649  0.0023  0.0923  0.2757  0.0534  0.12
Biret 1990   31  0.6523  0.0033  0.0834  0.0840  0.0748  0.07
Blet 2003   57  0.5741  0.0057  0.0740  0.0750  0.0551  0.06
Block 1995   42  0.6229  0.0040  0.0650  0.0659  0.0458  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   58  0.5650  0.0058  0.0460  0.0457  0.0561  0.04
Chiu 1999   41  0.6335  0.0041  0.0554  0.0554  0.0555  0.05
Clidat 1994   38  0.6319  0.0020  0.0825  0.2355  0.0438  0.10
Cohen 1997   63  0.4657  0.0063  0.0649  0.0641  0.0559  0.05
Coop 1987   16  0.6736  0.0012  0.1014  0.4243  0.0818  0.18
Cortot 1951   52  0.5932  0.0051  0.0461  0.0426  0.2936  0.11
Czerny 1949   6  0.7015  0.004  0.373  0.6119  0.462  0.53
Czerny 1949b   13  0.6822  0.0010  0.098  0.4627  0.305  0.37
Ezaki 2006   33  0.6466  0.0042  0.0736  0.0750  0.0742  0.07
Falvay 1989   45  0.6142  0.0048  0.0737  0.0748  0.0743  0.07
Ferenczy 1958   54  0.5813  0.0036  0.0552  0.0521  0.3431  0.13
Fiorentino 1962   20  0.6640  0.0027  0.0724  0.2442  0.0828  0.14
Fliere 1977   18  0.6762  0.0015  0.1315  0.3943  0.0719  0.17
Fou 1978   8  0.693  0.046  0.176  0.5234  0.1015  0.23
Francois 1956   61  0.5214  0.0062  0.0555  0.0552  0.0560  0.05
Hatto 1997   53  0.5964  0.0054  0.0556  0.0548  0.0656  0.05
Horowitz 1971   36  0.6410  0.0137  0.0644  0.0618  0.3724  0.15
Horowitz 1985   59  0.5424  0.0059  0.0364  0.0333  0.1149  0.06
Indjic 2001   44  0.6160  0.0043  0.0835  0.0857  0.0552  0.06
Kapell 1951   24  0.6631  0.0024  0.0821  0.2849  0.0630  0.13
Kiepura 1999   43  0.6158  0.0049  0.0647  0.0652  0.0553  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   15  0.6751  0.0014  0.0912  0.4339  0.1017  0.21
Kissin 1993   3  0.7121  0.003  0.305  0.5933  0.129  0.27
Kitain 1937   62  0.4645  0.0061  0.0557  0.0513  0.4423  0.15
Kushner 1990   56  0.5743  0.0055  0.0458  0.0457  0.0462  0.04
Levy 1951   25  0.6530  0.0029  0.0927  0.2125  0.3112  0.26
Luisada 1990   37  0.6353  0.0044  0.0739  0.0746  0.0846  0.07
Lushtak 2004   48  0.6044  0.0052  0.0459  0.0459  0.0463  0.04
Lympany 1968   47  0.6038  0.0050  0.0648  0.0648  0.0554  0.05
Magaloff 1977   5  0.7028  0.007  0.139  0.4628  0.306  0.37
Magaloff 1977b   7  0.7016  0.008  0.1113  0.4329  0.267  0.33
Magin 1975   40  0.6352  0.0046  0.0741  0.0745  0.0844  0.07
Milkina 1970   17  0.676  0.0116  0.0710  0.4420  0.414  0.42
Mohovich 1999   26  0.6517  0.0031  0.0631  0.1635  0.0735  0.11
Nadelmann 1956   51  0.597  0.0145  0.0738  0.0750  0.0650  0.06
Ohlsson 1999   22  0.665  0.0122  0.0920  0.2828  0.2413  0.26
Olejniczac 1990   19  0.6727  0.0021  0.0922  0.2749  0.0632  0.13
Olejniczak 1991   28  0.6537  0.0028  0.0828  0.2139  0.0926  0.14
Osinska 1989   9  0.6948  0.009  0.127  0.4853  0.0620  0.17
Paderewski 1912   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Perahia 1994   60  0.5346  0.0060  0.0462  0.0450  0.0564  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   39  0.6312  0.0139  0.0645  0.0630  0.1737  0.10
Poblocka 1999   14  0.6855  0.0017  0.0717  0.3653  0.0529  0.13
Rangell 2001   34  0.6447  0.0034  0.1033  0.1044  0.0741  0.08
Risler 1920   55  0.5854  0.0056  0.0651  0.0636  0.1139  0.08
Rosen 1989   49  0.6026  0.0053  0.0553  0.0532  0.1340  0.08
Rubinstein 1939   50  0.5934  0.0038  0.0643  0.0624  0.3127  0.14
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.684  0.0219  0.0819  0.3335  0.0725  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   27  0.6520  0.0025  0.0826  0.2220  0.3311  0.27
Rummel 1943   30  0.6511  0.0130  0.0830  0.183  0.588  0.32
Shebanova 2002   35  0.6439  0.0035  0.0742  0.0762  0.0457  0.05
Smith 1975   2  0.722  0.052  0.322  0.678  0.511  0.58
Szpilman 1948   4  0.708  0.015  0.174  0.6024  0.423  0.50
Uninsky 1971   10  0.6818  0.0011  0.1011  0.4331  0.1710  0.27
Wasowski 1980   23  0.669  0.0126  0.0729  0.1937  0.0833  0.12
Weissenberg 1971   29  0.6561  0.0018  0.0918  0.3544  0.0722  0.16
Average   1  0.781  0.761  0.751  0.8539  0.0814  0.26
Random 1    66  -0.0665  0.0066  0.0166  0.0161  0.0266  0.01
Random 2   64  0.0059  0.0064  0.0363  0.0349  0.0365  0.03
Random 3   65  -0.0256  0.0065  0.0265  0.0222  0.2447  0.07

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).