Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   7  0.821  0.211  0.201  0.6428  0.179  0.33
Ax 1995   14  0.808  0.038  0.117  0.539  0.384  0.45
Bacha 1998   55  0.7149  0.0053  0.0549  0.0539  0.0651  0.05
Barbosa 1983   59  0.6619  0.0128  0.0830  0.2135  0.0830  0.13
BenOr 1989   44  0.7313  0.0229  0.0831  0.1734  0.0933  0.12
Biret 1990   30  0.7760  0.0044  0.0556  0.0558  0.0463  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   50  0.7241  0.0058  0.0548  0.0544  0.0649  0.05
Chiu 1999   35  0.7630  0.0037  0.0546  0.0533  0.1143  0.07
Clidat 1994   38  0.7535  0.0027  0.0825  0.2648  0.0632  0.12
Cohen 1997   61  0.6358  0.0061  0.0460  0.0437  0.0756  0.05
Cortot 1951   63  0.5737  0.0062  0.0463  0.0437  0.0657  0.05
Csalog 1996   28  0.7810  0.0333  0.0833  0.0832  0.1436  0.11
Czerny 1989   27  0.784  0.0614  0.1110  0.4413  0.425  0.43
Ezaki 2006   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Falvay 1989   8  0.8228  0.0021  0.139  0.4544  0.0622  0.16
Fiorentino 1962   6  0.8221  0.0020  0.1115  0.4332  0.1315  0.24
Fliere 1977   12  0.8132  0.0023  0.1024  0.3158  0.0434  0.11
Fou 1978   31  0.7724  0.0018  0.0913  0.4334  0.0918  0.20
Francois 1956   51  0.7239  0.0039  0.0543  0.0518  0.3531  0.13
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.6056  0.0063  0.0638  0.0633  0.0941  0.07
Gornostaeva 1994   54  0.7116  0.0110  0.1119  0.4010  0.523  0.46
Groot 1988   23  0.7942  0.0034  0.0634  0.0642  0.0646  0.06
Hatto 1993   10  0.8129  0.007  0.108  0.4845  0.0621  0.17
Hatto 1997   18  0.8048  0.0015  0.0914  0.4349  0.0623  0.16
Horszowski 1983   39  0.7547  0.0035  0.0636  0.0633  0.1038  0.08
Indjic 2001   13  0.8112  0.0212  0.1111  0.4435  0.0719  0.18
Katin 1996   16  0.8022  0.0036  0.0637  0.0646  0.0552  0.05
Kiepura 1999   60  0.6543  0.0056  0.0462  0.0428  0.1440  0.07
Korecka 1992   49  0.7217  0.0157  0.0458  0.0430  0.1244  0.07
Kushner 1990   58  0.6644  0.0051  0.0459  0.0460  0.0364  0.03
Lilamand 2001   47  0.7238  0.0049  0.0541  0.0515  0.4526  0.15
Luisada 1990   37  0.7652  0.0032  0.0732  0.1326  0.1629  0.14
Luisada 2008   33  0.7661  0.0038  0.0555  0.0535  0.0653  0.05
Lushtak 2004   9  0.8223  0.009  0.1316  0.4321  0.406  0.41
Malcuzynski 1951   57  0.7114  0.0116  0.0920  0.4028  0.1614  0.25
Malcuzynski 1961   46  0.7326  0.0017  0.1021  0.3741  0.0625  0.15
Magaloff 1977   22  0.7925  0.0022  0.1217  0.4018  0.358  0.37
Magin 1975   11  0.8134  0.0011  0.1112  0.4417  0.377  0.40
Meguri 1997   40  0.755  0.0613  0.1128  0.2320  0.2416  0.23
Milkina 1970   4  0.836  0.044  0.206  0.5619  0.422  0.48
Mohovich 1999   26  0.7954  0.0045  0.0635  0.0662  0.0362  0.04
Nezu 2005   21  0.7915  0.0119  0.0918  0.4027  0.2112  0.29
Ohlsson 1999   32  0.7727  0.0054  0.0551  0.0553  0.0460  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   19  0.8020  0.0131  0.1129  0.2227  0.1520  0.18
Osinska 1989   5  0.833  0.116  0.142  0.6130  0.1411  0.29
Perlemuter 1992   48  0.7259  0.0060  0.0553  0.0543  0.0548  0.05
Poblocka 1999   3  0.847  0.035  0.145  0.5729  0.1710  0.31
Rangell 2001   2  0.842  0.202  0.293  0.602  0.691  0.64
Richter 1960   45  0.7355  0.0040  0.0544  0.0527  0.1637  0.09
Richter 1961   56  0.7157  0.0046  0.0639  0.0634  0.0842  0.07
Rosen 1989   43  0.7446  0.0041  0.0554  0.0545  0.0555  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   42  0.7440  0.0050  0.0552  0.0549  0.0650  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   53  0.7164  0.0047  0.0545  0.0550  0.0558  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   24  0.7950  0.0026  0.1022  0.3443  0.0628  0.14
Rudanovskaya 2007   36  0.7662  0.0059  0.0547  0.0548  0.0554  0.05
Shebanova 2002   20  0.7953  0.0025  0.0923  0.3239  0.0727  0.15
Smith 1975   25  0.7945  0.0042  0.0542  0.0520  0.2435  0.11
Sztompka 1959   34  0.7636  0.0055  0.0461  0.0431  0.1539  0.08
Tanyel 1992   15  0.8011  0.0224  0.0826  0.2521  0.3013  0.27
Tsujii 2005   1  0.879  0.033  0.144  0.5934  0.0917  0.23
Uninsky 1959   29  0.7851  0.0043  0.0557  0.0553  0.0459  0.04
Vardi 1988   41  0.7418  0.0148  0.0640  0.0637  0.0645  0.06
Wasowski 1980   52  0.7133  0.0052  0.0550  0.0551  0.0547  0.05
Zimerman 1975   17  0.8031  0.0030  0.0927  0.2432  0.1124  0.16
Random 1   66  -0.1265  0.0066  0.0166  0.0152  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   65  -0.0263  0.0065  0.0264  0.0233  0.0761  0.04
Random 3   64  0.0166  0.0064  0.0265  0.0251  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).