Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   12  0.8417  0.018  0.157  0.6617  0.3914  0.51
Ax 1995   33  0.7711  0.0137  0.0836  0.0829  0.2238  0.13
Bacha 1998   41  0.7555  0.0044  0.0461  0.0432  0.1342  0.07
Barbosa 1983   52  0.7121  0.0117  0.1223  0.455  0.5316  0.49
BenOr 1989   56  0.6946  0.0051  0.0543  0.0546  0.0656  0.05
Biret 1990   19  0.8223  0.0019  0.1121  0.5017  0.3722  0.43
Brailowsky 1960   32  0.7847  0.0040  0.0548  0.0531  0.1840  0.09
Chiu 1999   17  0.8322  0.0114  0.1219  0.5111  0.5710  0.54
Clidat 1994   8  0.858  0.036  0.205  0.685  0.703  0.69
Cohen 1997   59  0.6742  0.0060  0.0641  0.0614  0.4632  0.17
Cortot 1951   64  0.4967  0.0064  0.0546  0.0542  0.0558  0.05
Csalog 1996   25  0.8125  0.0038  0.0834  0.0826  0.2835  0.15
Czerny 1989   43  0.7459  0.0047  0.0457  0.0445  0.0561  0.04
Ezaki 2006   29  0.8056  0.0041  0.0547  0.0538  0.0649  0.05
Falvay 1989   24  0.8120  0.0128  0.1725  0.4336  0.0731  0.17
Fiorentino 1962   2  0.885  0.045  0.324  0.696  0.674  0.68
Fliere 1977   10  0.8449  0.0022  0.1020  0.5126  0.2524  0.36
Fou 1978   27  0.8014  0.0112  0.1310  0.602  0.666  0.63
Francois 1956   53  0.7128  0.0056  0.0549  0.0532  0.1541  0.09
Goldenweiser 1946   63  0.5261  0.0063  0.0463  0.0461  0.0366  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   54  0.7032  0.0039  0.0737  0.0721  0.3933  0.17
Groot 1988   11  0.8419  0.0118  0.1115  0.556  0.5013  0.52
Hatto 1993   18  0.8216  0.0113  0.1416  0.5312  0.4617  0.49
Hatto 1997   22  0.8234  0.0016  0.1917  0.5214  0.4418  0.48
Horszowski 1983   58  0.6841  0.0052  0.0550  0.0537  0.0745  0.06
Indjic 2001   20  0.8218  0.0115  0.1518  0.5212  0.4419  0.48
Katin 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kiepura 1999   55  0.6950  0.0045  0.0452  0.044  0.5834  0.15
Korecka 1992   61  0.6633  0.0061  0.0544  0.0558  0.0460  0.04
Kushner 1990   60  0.6612  0.0133  0.0633  0.1233  0.1239  0.12
Lilamand 2001   62  0.6039  0.0062  0.0640  0.0637  0.0843  0.07
Luisada 1990   46  0.7344  0.0054  0.0551  0.0546  0.0554  0.05
Luisada 2008   47  0.7345  0.0053  0.0453  0.0462  0.0462  0.04
Lushtak 2004   31  0.7829  0.0034  0.0642  0.0637  0.0747  0.06
Malcuzynski 1951   57  0.6837  0.0049  0.0456  0.0447  0.0565  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   49  0.7248  0.0036  0.0835  0.0853  0.0546  0.06
Magaloff 1977   26  0.8126  0.0024  0.1224  0.4411  0.4920  0.46
Magin 1975   42  0.7543  0.0048  0.0462  0.0446  0.0559  0.04
Meguri 1997   51  0.7151  0.0055  0.0459  0.0443  0.0653  0.05
Milkina 1970   9  0.8424  0.0011  0.129  0.626  0.647  0.63
Mohovich 1999   15  0.8331  0.0021  0.1112  0.608  0.4712  0.53
Nezu 2005   35  0.7740  0.0023  0.0829  0.3249  0.0637  0.14
Ohlsson 1999   6  0.876  0.047  0.1713  0.586  0.568  0.57
Olejniczak 1990   34  0.7738  0.0035  0.0738  0.0741  0.0548  0.06
Osinska 1989   28  0.8013  0.0129  0.1528  0.3732  0.1330  0.22
Perlemuter 1992   38  0.7760  0.0043  0.0454  0.047  0.4636  0.14
Poblocka 1999   13  0.8410  0.0220  0.1014  0.5733  0.1427  0.28
Rangell 2001   45  0.7352  0.0058  0.0639  0.0657  0.0457  0.05
Richter 1960   37  0.7727  0.0030  0.1130  0.2714  0.4525  0.35
Richter 1961   36  0.7762  0.0031  0.0731  0.1915  0.4526  0.29
Rosen 1989   40  0.7630  0.0042  0.0460  0.0436  0.0655  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   3  0.882  0.192  0.212  0.734  0.751  0.74
Rubinstein 1952   14  0.833  0.124  0.216  0.666  0.635  0.64
Rubinstein 1966   4  0.884  0.123  0.203  0.734  0.672  0.70
Rudanovskaya 2007   30  0.8036  0.0032  0.0732  0.1413  0.5328  0.27
Shebanova 2002   7  0.8635  0.009  0.1311  0.6016  0.4711  0.53
Smith 1975   39  0.7654  0.0050  0.0458  0.0440  0.0651  0.05
Sztompka 1959   48  0.7363  0.0057  0.0455  0.0436  0.0652  0.05
Tanyel 1992   50  0.7258  0.0059  0.0545  0.0559  0.0463  0.04
Tsujii 2005   5  0.879  0.0210  0.138  0.6333  0.1229  0.27
Uninsky 1959   21  0.8215  0.0125  0.1322  0.4719  0.4221  0.44
Vardi 1988   23  0.8153  0.0026  0.1326  0.429  0.5715  0.49
Wasowski 1980   44  0.7457  0.0046  0.0464  0.0435  0.0750  0.05
Zimerman 1975   16  0.837  0.0327  0.1527  0.3913  0.4323  0.41
Average   1  0.901  0.231  0.231  0.8621  0.369  0.56
Random 1   67  -0.1065  0.0066  0.0266  0.0221  0.2244  0.07
Random 2   66  -0.0164  0.0067  0.0167  0.0135  0.0767  0.03
Random 3   65  0.0366  0.0065  0.0265  0.0232  0.1064  0.04

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).