Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   31  0.745  0.0115  0.1514  0.4353  0.0518  0.15
Ax 1995   45  0.7058  0.0051  0.0551  0.0554  0.0558  0.05
Bacha 1998   48  0.6838  0.0045  0.0643  0.0662  0.0450  0.05
Barbosa 1983   62  0.5561  0.0052  0.0461  0.0459  0.0462  0.04
BenOr 1989   47  0.6862  0.0020  0.0629  0.1333  0.1030  0.11
Biret 1990   30  0.7432  0.0041  0.0552  0.0540  0.0745  0.06
Brailowsky 1960   29  0.7445  0.0039  0.0733  0.0737  0.0837  0.07
Chiu 1999   27  0.7521  0.0043  0.0641  0.0632  0.1136  0.08
Clidat 1994   40  0.7250  0.0035  0.0636  0.0657  0.0556  0.05
Cohen 1997   42  0.7142  0.0050  0.0454  0.047  0.5419  0.15
Cortot 1951   60  0.5935  0.0055  0.0362  0.0311  0.3831  0.11
Csalog 1996   1  0.861  0.361  0.354  0.681  0.621  0.65
Czerny 1989   52  0.6756  0.0060  0.0644  0.0652  0.0551  0.05
Ezaki 2006   13  0.7940  0.0025  0.0520  0.2442  0.0528  0.11
Falvay 1989   9  0.7911  0.018  0.159  0.5034  0.0913  0.21
Fiorentino 1962   16  0.7813  0.0122  0.0625  0.2033  0.0822  0.13
Fliere 1977   17  0.7818  0.0019  0.0618  0.3340  0.0620  0.14
Fou 1978   53  0.6653  0.0053  0.0460  0.0460  0.0461  0.04
Francois 1956   38  0.739  0.0140  0.0553  0.0520  0.3027  0.12
Goldenweiser 1946   55  0.6548  0.0047  0.0456  0.0418  0.2732  0.10
Gornostaeva 1994   61  0.5949  0.0056  0.0550  0.0546  0.0559  0.05
Groot 1988   6  0.8323  0.007  0.215  0.6213  0.336  0.45
Hatto 1993   19  0.7733  0.0013  0.188  0.5133  0.0914  0.21
Hatto 1997   25  0.7615  0.0112  0.1110  0.4931  0.1112  0.23
Horszowski 1983   46  0.7039  0.0057  0.0458  0.0441  0.0649  0.05
Indjic 2001   21  0.7710  0.0114  0.2111  0.4836  0.0716  0.18
Katin 1996   24  0.7647  0.0042  0.0639  0.0657  0.0453  0.05
Kiepura 1999   63  0.5446  0.0063  0.0642  0.0645  0.0548  0.05
Korecka 1992   51  0.6765  0.0058  0.0546  0.0534  0.0841  0.06
Kushner 1990   56  0.6357  0.0046  0.0734  0.0756  0.0454  0.05
Lilamand 2001   14  0.7827  0.0010  0.127  0.531  0.683  0.60
Luisada 1990   33  0.7422  0.0037  0.0545  0.0560  0.0463  0.04
Luisada 2008   41  0.7143  0.0044  0.0640  0.0637  0.0643  0.06
Lushtak 2004   28  0.7544  0.0021  0.0619  0.2845  0.0526  0.12
Malcuzynski 1951   58  0.6316  0.0124  0.0531  0.0959  0.0446  0.06
Malcuzynski 1961   49  0.6819  0.0016  0.1815  0.3860  0.0423  0.12
Magaloff 1977   22  0.766  0.019  0.1022  0.2241  0.0724  0.12
Magin 1975   32  0.7434  0.0031  0.0530  0.1049  0.0539  0.07
Meguri 1997   18  0.7826  0.0027  0.0523  0.2218  0.2511  0.23
Milkina 1970   20  0.7724  0.0030  0.0927  0.1744  0.0535  0.09
Mohovich 1999   10  0.7914  0.0117  0.1616  0.3737  0.0617  0.15
Nezu 2005   43  0.7131  0.0038  0.0635  0.0634  0.0840  0.07
Ohlsson 1999   2  0.862  0.352  0.362  0.697  0.552  0.62
Olejniczak 1990   34  0.7451  0.0028  0.0826  0.1949  0.0534  0.10
Osinska 1989   36  0.7329  0.0026  0.0524  0.2043  0.0629  0.11
Perlemuter 1992   12  0.7925  0.0034  0.0549  0.059  0.4221  0.14
Poblocka 1999   23  0.7641  0.0023  0.0521  0.2258  0.0533  0.10
Rangell 2001   26  0.7636  0.0036  0.0547  0.0535  0.0744  0.06
Richter 1960   57  0.638  0.0161  0.0637  0.0658  0.0455  0.05
Richter 1961   59  0.6054  0.0062  0.0457  0.0461  0.0460  0.04
Rosen 1989   7  0.804  0.054  0.1913  0.4510  0.437  0.44
Rubinstein 1939   37  0.7330  0.0032  0.0532  0.0944  0.0638  0.07
Rubinstein 1952   44  0.7020  0.0033  0.0638  0.0640  0.0647  0.06
Rubinstein 1966   39  0.7237  0.0049  0.0459  0.0435  0.0842  0.06
Rudanovskaya 2007   8  0.8028  0.0029  0.0628  0.1513  0.519  0.28
Shebanova 2002   15  0.7863  0.0011  0.1112  0.4634  0.0915  0.20
Smith 1975   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Sztompka 1959   5  0.8312  0.016  0.186  0.568  0.595  0.57
Tanyel 1992   11  0.7917  0.0118  0.0917  0.3523  0.288  0.31
Tsujii 2005   3  0.857  0.015  0.221  0.7037  0.0810  0.24
Uninsky 1959   4  0.843  0.063  0.383  0.689  0.524  0.59
Vardi 1988   50  0.6859  0.0059  0.0548  0.0550  0.0552  0.05
Wasowski 1980   54  0.6555  0.0054  0.0363  0.0359  0.0464  0.03
Zimerman 1975   35  0.7352  0.0048  0.0455  0.0441  0.0657  0.05
Random 1   66  -0.1166  0.0066  0.0166  0.0161  0.0266  0.01
Random 2   64  0.0360  0.0064  0.0364  0.033  0.5025  0.12
Random 3   65  -0.0264  0.0065  0.0265  0.0263  0.0365  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).