Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.685  0.069  0.175  0.6229  0.2016  0.35
Ax 1995   7  0.667  0.0421  0.1314  0.5224  0.329  0.41
Bacha 1998   46  0.5723  0.0047  0.0744  0.0742  0.0747  0.07
Barbosa 1983   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
BenOr 1989   13  0.6520  0.0132  0.1231  0.2428  0.1531  0.19
Biret 1990   12  0.6515  0.0127  0.1022  0.4536  0.0929  0.20
Brailowsky 1960   49  0.5548  0.0050  0.0746  0.0752  0.0550  0.06
Chiu 1999   39  0.608  0.0316  0.0926  0.3315  0.4811  0.40
Clidat 1994   17  0.6513  0.0128  0.1025  0.3432  0.2223  0.27
Cohen 1997   63  0.4062  0.0063  0.0654  0.0642  0.0654  0.06
Cortot 1951   59  0.4846  0.0062  0.0655  0.0646  0.0562  0.05
Csalog 1996   30  0.6244  0.0039  0.0743  0.0732  0.1340  0.10
Czerny 1989   32  0.6216  0.0117  0.0818  0.4815  0.503  0.49
Ezaki 2006   25  0.6317  0.0125  0.0824  0.3518  0.506  0.42
Falvay 1989   10  0.664  0.0810  0.131  0.6745  0.0726  0.22
Fiorentino 1962   29  0.6245  0.0036  0.0936  0.0940  0.0844  0.08
Fliere 1977   38  0.6041  0.0044  0.0934  0.0947  0.0645  0.07
Fou 1978   5  0.6710  0.026  0.1410  0.5833  0.1422  0.28
Francois 1956   51  0.5440  0.0054  0.0653  0.0639  0.0658  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   60  0.4634  0.0059  0.0557  0.0540  0.0749  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   22  0.6412  0.0142  0.0839  0.0831  0.1737  0.12
Groot 1988   41  0.5931  0.0040  0.0745  0.0749  0.0656  0.06
Hatto 1993   16  0.6543  0.003  0.207  0.6127  0.2810  0.41
Hatto 1997   11  0.652  0.102  0.294  0.6224  0.315  0.44
Horszowski 1983   54  0.5232  0.0033  0.0933  0.094  0.4927  0.21
Indjic 2001   18  0.6429  0.005  0.198  0.5930  0.2514  0.38
Katin 1996   14  0.6518  0.0111  0.1111  0.5825  0.364  0.46
Kiepura 1999   37  0.6025  0.0046  0.0649  0.0630  0.2138  0.11
Korecka 1992   43  0.5733  0.0049  0.0556  0.0522  0.3235  0.13
Kushner 1990   27  0.6360  0.0029  0.0928  0.2931  0.1925  0.23
Lilamand 2001   57  0.5253  0.0053  0.0560  0.0521  0.3436  0.13
Luisada 1990   44  0.5739  0.0041  0.0935  0.0943  0.0743  0.08
Luisada 2008   45  0.5757  0.0048  0.0647  0.0649  0.0559  0.05
Lushtak 2004   35  0.6037  0.0038  0.0741  0.0748  0.0652  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   28  0.6335  0.0035  0.0837  0.0858  0.0557  0.06
Malcuzynski 1961   2  0.693  0.094  0.179  0.5924  0.298  0.41
Magaloff 1977   40  0.5956  0.0023  0.0830  0.2614  0.3420  0.30
Magin 1975   6  0.6622  0.008  0.166  0.6117  0.462  0.53
Meguri 1997   50  0.5436  0.0043  0.0838  0.0833  0.0841  0.08
Milkina 1970   33  0.6164  0.0018  0.0921  0.4626  0.3213  0.38
Mohovich 1999   47  0.5661  0.0037  0.0742  0.0745  0.0653  0.06
Nezu 2005   21  0.6454  0.0024  0.0820  0.4744  0.0830  0.19
Ohlsson 1999   19  0.6455  0.0019  0.1017  0.4926  0.2217  0.33
Olejniczak 1990   31  0.6219  0.0126  0.0927  0.3028  0.2324  0.26
Osinska 1989   8  0.666  0.0413  0.1013  0.5349  0.0632  0.18
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.4559  0.0060  0.0558  0.0531  0.0946  0.07
Poblocka 1999   24  0.6349  0.0031  0.1029  0.2649  0.0734  0.13
Rangell 2001   52  0.5328  0.0058  0.0652  0.0649  0.0655  0.06
Richter 1960   55  0.5238  0.0056  0.0651  0.0636  0.0751  0.06
Richter 1961   58  0.5050  0.0057  0.0561  0.0563  0.0463  0.04
Rosen 1989   53  0.5351  0.0051  0.0650  0.0654  0.0561  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   26  0.6314  0.0115  0.0916  0.4931  0.1621  0.28
Rubinstein 1952   1  0.701  0.371  0.362  0.6511  0.521  0.58
Rubinstein 1966   4  0.6824  0.007  0.143  0.6427  0.287  0.42
Rudanovskaya 2007   62  0.4327  0.0061  0.0463  0.0453  0.0465  0.04
Shebanova 2002   23  0.6342  0.0020  0.1419  0.4725  0.2615  0.35
Smith 1975   56  0.5263  0.0055  0.0462  0.0461  0.0564  0.04
Sztompka 1959   42  0.5921  0.0030  0.1032  0.1916  0.4918  0.31
Tanyel 1992   48  0.5647  0.0052  0.0559  0.0556  0.0560  0.05
Tsujii 2005   9  0.6630  0.0014  0.1312  0.5641  0.0828  0.21
Uninsky 1959   20  0.6426  0.0012  0.1415  0.5128  0.3012  0.39
Vardi 1988   36  0.6011  0.0134  0.0840  0.0825  0.3033  0.15
Wasowski 1980   34  0.6052  0.0045  0.0648  0.0642  0.0748  0.06
Zimerman 1975   15  0.659  0.0322  0.0923  0.4427  0.2219  0.31
Random 1   66  -0.0358  0.0066  0.0166  0.0127  0.1366  0.04
Random 2   65  0.0266  0.0065  0.0265  0.0217  0.2942  0.08
Random 3   64  0.0265  0.0064  0.0364  0.0310  0.3939  0.11

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).