Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.7610  0.0211  0.103  0.5737  0.0722  0.20
Ax 1995   20  0.7016  0.0122  0.1021  0.3531  0.1820  0.25
Bacha 1998   37  0.6544  0.0045  0.0557  0.0536  0.0652  0.05
Barbosa 1983   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
BenOr 1989   13  0.713  0.0325  0.1027  0.2225  0.2121  0.21
Biret 1990   6  0.7319  0.0118  0.106  0.5237  0.0823  0.20
Brailowsky 1960   49  0.6039  0.0053  0.0460  0.0448  0.0559  0.04
Chiu 1999   34  0.665  0.0316  0.0926  0.2914  0.4310  0.35
Clidat 1994   15  0.7122  0.0132  0.0731  0.1345  0.0638  0.09
Cohen 1997   61  0.4621  0.0163  0.0546  0.0562  0.0364  0.04
Cortot 1951   54  0.5659  0.0062  0.0549  0.0545  0.0558  0.05
Csalog 1996   40  0.6440  0.0050  0.0544  0.0535  0.0745  0.06
Czerny 1989   43  0.627  0.0319  0.0919  0.408  0.467  0.43
Ezaki 2006   36  0.6641  0.0035  0.0835  0.0830  0.2130  0.13
Falvay 1989   35  0.664  0.0331  0.0632  0.1352  0.0540  0.08
Fiorentino 1962   22  0.7050  0.0033  0.0738  0.0749  0.0648  0.06
Fliere 1977   28  0.6855  0.0039  0.0551  0.0536  0.0651  0.05
Fou 1978   4  0.7520  0.019  0.115  0.5321  0.338  0.42
Francois 1956   47  0.6133  0.0048  0.0554  0.0538  0.0750  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   63  0.4434  0.0060  0.0553  0.0539  0.0743  0.06
Gornostaeva 1994   7  0.7327  0.0037  0.0737  0.0729  0.2332  0.13
Groot 1988   45  0.6125  0.0042  0.0934  0.0959  0.0449  0.06
Hatto 1993   29  0.6852  0.006  0.1111  0.4820  0.2415  0.34
Hatto 1997   27  0.6831  0.007  0.1610  0.4819  0.2513  0.35
Horszowski 1983   56  0.5511  0.0220  0.1023  0.325  0.439  0.37
Indjic 2001   30  0.6856  0.008  0.0912  0.4721  0.2118  0.31
Katin 1996   14  0.7113  0.024  0.134  0.5322  0.452  0.49
Kiepura 1999   32  0.6737  0.0049  0.0461  0.0421  0.2536  0.10
Korecka 1992   39  0.649  0.0251  0.0550  0.0523  0.2734  0.12
Kushner 1990   8  0.7215  0.0124  0.1322  0.3413  0.3414  0.34
Lilamand 2001   57  0.5561  0.0056  0.0740  0.0730  0.2235  0.12
Luisada 1990   50  0.6046  0.0043  0.0739  0.0752  0.0456  0.05
Luisada 2008   41  0.6329  0.0046  0.0547  0.0544  0.0555  0.05
Lushtak 2004   38  0.6449  0.0047  0.0641  0.0638  0.0646  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   12  0.7143  0.0036  0.0933  0.0947  0.0542  0.07
Malcuzynski 1961   2  0.762  0.0810  0.127  0.5226  0.2411  0.35
Magaloff 1977   11  0.7238  0.005  0.139  0.5113  0.445  0.47
Magin 1975   19  0.7130  0.0015  0.1014  0.4511  0.436  0.44
Meguri 1997   51  0.5960  0.0038  0.0642  0.0640  0.0644  0.06
Milkina 1970   24  0.696  0.032  0.218  0.5117  0.454  0.48
Mohovich 1999   53  0.5758  0.0041  0.0548  0.0533  0.0847  0.06
Nezu 2005   9  0.7235  0.0023  0.1115  0.4244  0.0628  0.16
Ohlsson 1999   26  0.6862  0.0014  0.0920  0.4024  0.3112  0.35
Olejniczak 1990   33  0.6628  0.0028  0.0729  0.1624  0.1729  0.16
Osinska 1989   16  0.7112  0.0227  0.1225  0.2944  0.0631  0.13
Perlemuter 1992   59  0.5245  0.0040  0.0545  0.0516  0.3133  0.12
Poblocka 1999   18  0.7124  0.0026  0.1024  0.3138  0.0826  0.16
Rangell 2001   44  0.6257  0.0052  0.0463  0.0454  0.0465  0.04
Richter 1960   58  0.5454  0.0058  0.0558  0.0538  0.0654  0.05
Richter 1961   60  0.5253  0.0059  0.0462  0.0458  0.0460  0.04
Rosen 1989   52  0.5847  0.0054  0.0643  0.0648  0.0557  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   25  0.6914  0.0112  0.1013  0.4624  0.2416  0.33
Rubinstein 1952   1  0.791  0.471  0.461  0.657  0.551  0.60
Rubinstein 1966   5  0.7518  0.013  0.212  0.6119  0.403  0.49
Rudanovskaya 2007   62  0.4532  0.0061  0.0556  0.0556  0.0462  0.04
Shebanova 2002   21  0.7051  0.0013  0.1018  0.4130  0.1519  0.25
Smith 1975   55  0.5563  0.0055  0.0459  0.0461  0.0461  0.04
Sztompka 1959   46  0.6123  0.0134  0.0836  0.0816  0.4124  0.18
Tanyel 1992   48  0.6042  0.0057  0.0552  0.0559  0.0363  0.04
Tsujii 2005   17  0.718  0.0221  0.1217  0.4248  0.0627  0.16
Uninsky 1959   31  0.6736  0.0017  0.1016  0.4225  0.2617  0.33
Vardi 1988   42  0.6317  0.0144  0.0555  0.0540  0.0653  0.05
Wasowski 1980   10  0.7248  0.0029  0.0730  0.1428  0.1825  0.16
Zimerman 1975   23  0.7026  0.0030  0.0728  0.1744  0.0637  0.10
Random 1   66  -0.1066  0.0066  0.0166  0.0132  0.0966  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0265  0.0065  0.0265  0.0222  0.2241  0.07
Random 3   65  0.0064  0.0064  0.0364  0.0316  0.2739  0.09

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).