Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   40  0.6712  0.0212  0.0713  0.2459  0.0522  0.11
Ax 1995   28  0.7145  0.0035  0.0644  0.0636  0.0742  0.06
Bacha 1998   48  0.658  0.0514  0.0725  0.1537  0.0629  0.09
Barbosa 1983   58  0.552  0.122  0.125  0.4323  0.322  0.37
BenOr 1989   52  0.6310  0.049  0.0810  0.2831  0.164  0.21
Biret 1990   14  0.7347  0.0010  0.096  0.3653  0.0516  0.13
Brailowsky 1960   41  0.6763  0.0048  0.0555  0.0549  0.0545  0.05
Chiu 1999   46  0.6648  0.0056  0.0738  0.0744  0.0537  0.06
Clidat 1994   53  0.6129  0.0050  0.0647  0.0661  0.0554  0.05
Cohen 1997   61  0.5036  0.0063  0.0558  0.0557  0.0462  0.04
Cortot 1951   63  0.4662  0.0061  0.0461  0.0462  0.0365  0.03
Csalog 1996   29  0.7151  0.0047  0.0639  0.0636  0.0639  0.06
Czerny 1989   2  0.755  0.076  0.108  0.3230  0.125  0.20
Ezaki 2006   3  0.7516  0.0133  0.1033  0.1036  0.0632  0.08
Falvay 1989   23  0.7119  0.0116  0.1014  0.2359  0.0424  0.10
Fiorentino 1962   42  0.6740  0.0052  0.0554  0.0541  0.0656  0.05
Fliere 1977   36  0.6854  0.0038  0.0642  0.0663  0.0443  0.05
Fou 1978   49  0.6518  0.0121  0.0622  0.1853  0.0528  0.09
Francois 1956   60  0.5266  0.0062  0.0557  0.0552  0.0558  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   38  0.677  0.057  0.0916  0.2314  0.373  0.29
Gornostaeva 1994   59  0.5522  0.0141  0.0643  0.0632  0.1330  0.09
Groot 1988   10  0.7425  0.0032  0.0632  0.1260  0.0435  0.07
Hatto 1993   9  0.7460  0.0023  0.0615  0.2339  0.0717  0.13
Hatto 1997   12  0.7452  0.0025  0.0617  0.2358  0.0520  0.11
Horszowski 1983   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Indjic 2001   11  0.7464  0.0029  0.0624  0.1738  0.0721  0.11
Katin 1996   37  0.6826  0.0053  0.0736  0.0749  0.0538  0.06
Kiepura 1999   62  0.4844  0.0059  0.0462  0.0461  0.0459  0.04
Korecka 1992   33  0.6939  0.0042  0.0646  0.0626  0.2518  0.12
Kushner 1990   54  0.6114  0.0211  0.0819  0.2135  0.0525  0.10
Lilamand 2001   35  0.6813  0.0226  0.0531  0.1224  0.307  0.19
Luisada 1990   18  0.7227  0.0020  0.0611  0.2731  0.128  0.18
Luisada 2008   30  0.7056  0.0031  0.0628  0.1348  0.0534  0.08
Lushtak 2004   26  0.7149  0.0030  0.0620  0.2055  0.0526  0.10
Malcuzynski 1951   55  0.6057  0.0018  0.0629  0.1361  0.0436  0.07
Malcuzynski 1961   51  0.634  0.073  0.134  0.4455  0.0510  0.15
Magaloff 1977   34  0.6942  0.0039  0.0834  0.0857  0.0540  0.06
Magin 1975   1  0.761  0.171  0.171  0.5923  0.271  0.40
Meguri 1997   24  0.7131  0.0027  0.0626  0.1451  0.0533  0.08
Milkina 1970   7  0.7433  0.0040  0.0645  0.0659  0.0449  0.05
Mohovich 1999   8  0.7459  0.0044  0.0553  0.0555  0.0555  0.05
Nezu 2005   47  0.6624  0.0122  0.0623  0.1852  0.0627  0.10
Ohlsson 1999   32  0.7028  0.0054  0.0648  0.0662  0.0361  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   20  0.7220  0.0124  0.0618  0.2353  0.0523  0.11
Osinska 1989   15  0.7353  0.008  0.082  0.4854  0.059  0.15
Perlemuter 1992   4  0.7511  0.0346  0.0651  0.0661  0.0444  0.05
Poblocka 1999   25  0.7132  0.0036  0.0652  0.0657  0.0546  0.05
Rangell 2001   22  0.7243  0.0034  0.0556  0.0547  0.0557  0.05
Richter 1960   56  0.6037  0.0057  0.0640  0.0649  0.0553  0.05
Richter 1961   57  0.5830  0.0058  0.0364  0.0342  0.0660  0.04
Rosen 1989   17  0.7246  0.0045  0.0835  0.0855  0.0441  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   45  0.6634  0.0051  0.0559  0.0543  0.0648  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   44  0.6615  0.0217  0.0727  0.1345  0.0631  0.09
Rubinstein 1966   19  0.7241  0.0037  0.0737  0.0762  0.0452  0.05
Rudanovskaya 2007   39  0.6717  0.0160  0.0460  0.0463  0.0364  0.03
Shebanova 2002   6  0.743  0.094  0.123  0.4456  0.0511  0.15
Smith 1975   31  0.7035  0.0049  0.0641  0.0658  0.0447  0.05
Sztompka 1959   13  0.7438  0.0028  0.0530  0.1332  0.1314  0.13
Tanyel 1992   21  0.726  0.0619  0.0621  0.1934  0.0719  0.12
Tsujii 2005   5  0.759  0.045  0.127  0.3445  0.0712  0.15
Uninsky 1959   27  0.7123  0.0143  0.0650  0.0656  0.0450  0.05
Vardi 1988   50  0.6555  0.0055  0.0649  0.0654  0.0451  0.05
Wasowski 1980   43  0.6621  0.0113  0.089  0.3032  0.126  0.19
Zimerman 1975   16  0.7250  0.0015  0.0812  0.2747  0.0615  0.13
Random 1   66  -0.1158  0.0066  0.0166  0.0147  0.0366  0.02
Random 2   65  -0.0561  0.0065  0.0265  0.0247  0.0463  0.03
Random 3   64  0.0865  0.0064  0.0463  0.041  0.5713  0.15

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).