Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   13  0.8017  0.018  0.115  0.5349  0.0521  0.16
Ax 1995   44  0.7221  0.0153  0.0639  0.0653  0.0555  0.05
Bacha 1998   47  0.7136  0.0035  0.0548  0.0563  0.0360  0.04
Barbosa 1983   60  0.6455  0.0050  0.0735  0.0744  0.0541  0.06
BenOr 1989   53  0.6932  0.0038  0.0552  0.0547  0.0656  0.05
Biret 1990   14  0.8013  0.0115  0.1112  0.4330  0.1316  0.24
Brailowsky 1960   32  0.7547  0.0041  0.0555  0.0536  0.0839  0.06
Chiu 1999   39  0.7325  0.0051  0.0833  0.0842  0.0636  0.07
Clidat 1994   19  0.7848  0.0018  0.1015  0.4032  0.1614  0.25
Cohen 1997   38  0.7314  0.0142  0.0456  0.042  0.6920  0.17
Cortot 1951   63  0.5528  0.0063  0.0644  0.0644  0.0557  0.05
Csalog 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Czerny 1989   51  0.7053  0.0057  0.0551  0.0554  0.0548  0.05
Ezaki 2006   22  0.789  0.0129  0.0632  0.1433  0.0835  0.11
Falvay 1989   23  0.7810  0.0117  0.0920  0.3549  0.0534  0.13
Fiorentino 1962   12  0.8112  0.0116  0.1016  0.3953  0.0531  0.14
Fliere 1977   7  0.838  0.0113  0.1214  0.4132  0.1317  0.23
Fou 1978   46  0.7146  0.0043  0.0463  0.0442  0.0747  0.05
Francois 1956   54  0.6854  0.0060  0.0643  0.0645  0.0644  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   58  0.6622  0.0140  0.0553  0.057  0.4522  0.15
Gornostaeva 1994   61  0.6256  0.0058  0.0459  0.0455  0.0564  0.04
Groot 1988   8  0.8311  0.014  0.132  0.614  0.513  0.56
Hatto 1993   27  0.7743  0.0026  0.0822  0.3346  0.0632  0.14
Hatto 1997   29  0.7720  0.0127  0.1221  0.3442  0.0724  0.15
Horszowski 1983   48  0.7152  0.0049  0.0636  0.0639  0.0638  0.06
Indjic 2001   28  0.7758  0.0028  0.1124  0.3250  0.0630  0.14
Katin 1996   11  0.8135  0.0023  0.0725  0.2833  0.0823  0.15
Kiepura 1999   62  0.5845  0.0062  0.0460  0.0454  0.0459  0.04
Korecka 1992   56  0.6662  0.0061  0.0550  0.0560  0.0361  0.04
Kushner 1990   57  0.6626  0.0045  0.0457  0.0457  0.0463  0.04
Lilamand 2001   36  0.7427  0.0032  0.0931  0.1712  0.4612  0.28
Luisada 1990   41  0.7357  0.0039  0.0642  0.0655  0.0453  0.05
Luisada 2008   45  0.7130  0.0047  0.0640  0.0643  0.0552  0.05
Lushtak 2004   26  0.7738  0.0020  0.1118  0.3831  0.1715  0.25
Malcuzynski 1951   50  0.705  0.0433  0.0638  0.0638  0.0558  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   40  0.7341  0.0014  0.0923  0.3237  0.0629  0.14
Magaloff 1977   42  0.7261  0.0055  0.0641  0.0650  0.0642  0.06
Magin 1975   34  0.7563  0.0037  0.0461  0.0432  0.1040  0.06
Meguri 1997   37  0.7466  0.0024  0.0630  0.1828  0.1619  0.17
Milkina 1970   31  0.7650  0.0048  0.0645  0.0660  0.0449  0.05
Mohovich 1999   10  0.826  0.045  0.109  0.5020  0.376  0.43
Nezu 2005   35  0.754  0.086  0.1217  0.3950  0.0625  0.15
Ohlsson 1999   4  0.847  0.0312  0.136  0.5322  0.347  0.42
Olejniczak 1990   20  0.7824  0.0011  0.1411  0.4413  0.419  0.42
Osinska 1989   15  0.8023  0.0019  0.0813  0.4155  0.0527  0.14
Perlemuter 1992   25  0.7849  0.0046  0.0549  0.0512  0.3926  0.14
Poblocka 1999   16  0.8018  0.0121  0.1219  0.3654  0.0533  0.13
Rangell 2001   21  0.7851  0.0030  0.0828  0.2324  0.3513  0.28
Richter 1960   55  0.6834  0.0054  0.0554  0.0554  0.0551  0.05
Richter 1961   59  0.6544  0.0059  0.0547  0.0547  0.0546  0.05
Rosen 1989   3  0.852  0.152  0.234  0.573  0.612  0.59
Rubinstein 1939   18  0.7937  0.0022  0.0826  0.2837  0.0728  0.14
Rubinstein 1952   33  0.7540  0.0034  0.0637  0.0643  0.0643  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   30  0.7639  0.0036  0.0646  0.0654  0.0550  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   17  0.7919  0.0125  0.0727  0.273  0.658  0.42
Shebanova 2002   9  0.8331  0.0010  0.268  0.5027  0.2310  0.34
Smith 1975   1  0.861  0.341  0.341  0.624  0.681  0.65
Sztompka 1959   24  0.7829  0.0031  0.0829  0.1812  0.4711  0.29
Tanyel 1992   6  0.8433  0.009  0.1510  0.468  0.485  0.47
Tsujii 2005   2  0.863  0.113  0.223  0.5939  0.0718  0.20
Uninsky 1959   5  0.8415  0.017  0.117  0.5316  0.454  0.49
Vardi 1988   49  0.7016  0.0152  0.0458  0.0455  0.0462  0.04
Wasowski 1980   52  0.7059  0.0044  0.0462  0.0447  0.0645  0.05
Zimerman 1975   43  0.7242  0.0056  0.0734  0.0762  0.0454  0.05
Random 1   66  -0.1265  0.0066  0.0166  0.0158  0.0266  0.01
Random 2   65  0.0164  0.0064  0.0265  0.0215  0.2737  0.07
Random 3   64  0.0260  0.0065  0.0264  0.0237  0.0565  0.03

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).