Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   14  0.784  0.017  0.1314  0.5824  0.2211  0.36
Ax 1995   47  0.6966  0.0033  0.0533  0.1050  0.0542  0.07
Bacha 1998   12  0.8015  0.005  0.159  0.6011  0.514  0.55
Barbosa 1983   60  0.6334  0.0048  0.0545  0.0548  0.0549  0.05
BenOr 1989   13  0.795  0.0111  0.1515  0.563  0.563  0.56
Biret 1990   11  0.8011  0.0017  0.1316  0.5323  0.2512  0.36
Brailowsky 1960   38  0.7164  0.0052  0.0540  0.0536  0.0939  0.07
Chiu 1999   46  0.6957  0.0057  0.0459  0.0450  0.0559  0.04
Clidat 1994   50  0.6856  0.0053  0.0734  0.0743  0.0645  0.06
Cohen 1997   64  0.5859  0.0064  0.0539  0.0546  0.0654  0.05
Cortot 1951   54  0.6738  0.0036  0.0542  0.051  0.6522  0.18
Csalog 1996   40  0.7160  0.0050  0.0544  0.0541  0.0650  0.05
Czerny 1989   31  0.7435  0.0018  0.1122  0.3322  0.3614  0.34
Ezaki 2006   21  0.7648  0.0034  0.0636  0.0656  0.0546  0.05
Falvay 1989   5  0.8223  0.004  0.194  0.7018  0.425  0.54
Fiorentino 1962   19  0.7743  0.0028  0.1027  0.2459  0.0532  0.11
Fliere 1977   20  0.7632  0.0019  0.1418  0.4529  0.2117  0.31
Fou 1978   23  0.7610  0.0016  0.1317  0.4824  0.2910  0.37
Francois 1956   55  0.6752  0.0054  0.0454  0.0445  0.0656  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.6053  0.0061  0.0548  0.0528  0.1836  0.09
Gornostaeva 1994   57  0.6651  0.0043  0.0452  0.0439  0.0755  0.05
Groot 1988   15  0.7820  0.0022  0.1024  0.2542  0.0629  0.12
Hatto 1993   6  0.828  0.0110  0.155  0.6324  0.2013  0.35
Hatto 1997   9  0.8116  0.0013  0.1612  0.5824  0.1816  0.32
Horszowski 1983   42  0.7062  0.0041  0.0549  0.0529  0.1338  0.08
Indjic 2001   7  0.8212  0.0014  0.1810  0.6023  0.1915  0.34
Katin 1996   36  0.7341  0.0049  0.0462  0.0453  0.0461  0.04
Kiepura 1999   63  0.6055  0.0063  0.0457  0.0445  0.0557  0.04
Korecka 1992   35  0.7342  0.0046  0.0455  0.0417  0.3827  0.12
Kushner 1990   58  0.6521  0.0024  0.1226  0.2439  0.0531  0.11
Lilamand 2001   59  0.6314  0.0060  0.0456  0.0444  0.0751  0.05
Luisada 1990   1  0.901  0.771  0.761  0.921  0.911  0.91
Luisada 2008   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lushtak 2004   2  0.862  0.073  0.273  0.768  0.692  0.72
Malcuzynski 1951   41  0.7117  0.0021  0.1119  0.4327  0.1720  0.27
Malcuzynski 1961   27  0.757  0.016  0.1911  0.5917  0.357  0.45
Magaloff 1977   33  0.7337  0.0042  0.0541  0.0550  0.0652  0.05
Magin 1975   26  0.7540  0.0037  0.0635  0.0656  0.0547  0.05
Meguri 1997   32  0.7461  0.0035  0.0637  0.0627  0.1735  0.10
Milkina 1970   29  0.7550  0.0031  0.0831  0.1748  0.0537  0.09
Mohovich 1999   22  0.766  0.0127  0.0923  0.3244  0.0625  0.14
Nezu 2005   8  0.819  0.018  0.148  0.6114  0.446  0.52
Ohlsson 1999   24  0.7618  0.0023  0.1021  0.3436  0.0526  0.13
Olejniczak 1990   25  0.7513  0.0032  0.0632  0.1232  0.1133  0.11
Osinska 1989   17  0.7739  0.0015  0.1213  0.5848  0.0523  0.17
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.6222  0.0059  0.0364  0.0348  0.0558  0.04
Poblocka 1999   4  0.8319  0.009  0.176  0.6227  0.269  0.40
Rangell 2001   16  0.7758  0.0025  0.0825  0.2423  0.3718  0.30
Richter 1960   51  0.6854  0.0040  0.0460  0.0431  0.1440  0.07
Richter 1961   48  0.6926  0.0039  0.0547  0.0526  0.2330  0.11
Rosen 1989   49  0.6849  0.0055  0.0450  0.0463  0.0367  0.03
Rubinstein 1939   52  0.6847  0.0056  0.0463  0.0455  0.0560  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   56  0.6644  0.0058  0.0451  0.0454  0.0566  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   37  0.7246  0.0044  0.0453  0.0448  0.0562  0.04
Rudanovskaya 2007   53  0.6845  0.0062  0.0458  0.0448  0.0563  0.04
Shebanova 2002   30  0.7425  0.0029  0.0829  0.1936  0.0828  0.12
Smith 1975   39  0.7136  0.0038  0.0638  0.0641  0.0643  0.06
Sztompka 1959   44  0.7063  0.0051  0.0543  0.0534  0.0844  0.06
Tanyel 1992   43  0.7029  0.0045  0.0461  0.0438  0.0653  0.05
Tsujii 2005   10  0.8028  0.0012  0.147  0.6150  0.0621  0.19
Uninsky 1959   34  0.7327  0.0026  0.0828  0.2145  0.0534  0.10
Vardi 1988   45  0.7031  0.0047  0.0546  0.0537  0.0648  0.05
Wasowski 1980   28  0.7524  0.0020  0.1320  0.4018  0.408  0.40
Zimerman 1975   18  0.7730  0.0030  0.0830  0.1926  0.1624  0.17
Average   3  0.863  0.042  0.352  0.8335  0.0919  0.27
Random 1   67  -0.0867  0.0067  0.0167  0.0126  0.1564  0.04
Random 2   66  0.0033  0.0066  0.0266  0.0226  0.2241  0.07
Random 3   65  0.0265  0.0065  0.0265  0.0233  0.1065  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).