Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   60  0.4042  0.0050  0.0739  0.0737  0.0758  0.07
Ax 1995   32  0.5422  0.0027  0.0926  0.3021  0.3825  0.34
Bacha 1998   61  0.3963  0.0061  0.0456  0.0448  0.0663  0.05
Barbosa 1983   35  0.548  0.0228  0.1030  0.2213  0.5224  0.34
BenOr 1989   22  0.5758  0.0021  0.1719  0.4722  0.5013  0.48
Biret 1990   20  0.5821  0.0020  0.1318  0.4817  0.4716  0.47
Brailowsky 1960   25  0.5640  0.0025  0.0924  0.3518  0.5518  0.44
Chiu 1999   56  0.4553  0.0058  0.0457  0.0432  0.1355  0.07
Clidat 1994   53  0.4646  0.0048  0.0644  0.0639  0.0762  0.06
Cohen 1997   63  0.3628  0.0062  0.0458  0.0414  0.5045  0.14
Cortot 1951   51  0.4852  0.0054  0.0363  0.033  0.5747  0.13
Csalog 1996   4  0.634  0.074  0.224  0.673  0.694  0.68
Czerny 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ezaki 2006   13  0.6041  0.0019  0.1317  0.489  0.589  0.53
Falvay 1989   1  0.653  0.073  0.292  0.7621  0.476  0.60
Fiorentino 1962   30  0.5529  0.0026  0.0927  0.2638  0.0941  0.15
Fliere 1977   28  0.557  0.0331  0.0831  0.2111  0.5026  0.32
Fou 1978   3  0.652  0.222  0.261  0.771  0.771  0.77
Francois 1956   59  0.4351  0.0053  0.0459  0.0447  0.0665  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   47  0.4959  0.0051  0.0936  0.0914  0.3931  0.19
Gornostaeva 1994   46  0.5045  0.0040  0.0651  0.066  0.6333  0.19
Groot 1988   6  0.615  0.055  0.309  0.616  0.615  0.61
Hatto 1993   10  0.6112  0.0111  0.1310  0.6023  0.4312  0.51
Hatto 1997   12  0.6024  0.0015  0.1111  0.5723  0.3914  0.47
Horszowski 1983   58  0.4461  0.0059  0.0555  0.0516  0.4142  0.14
Indjic 2001   11  0.6023  0.0016  0.1312  0.5724  0.3815  0.47
Katin 1996   16  0.5832  0.0010  0.1413  0.5525  0.3717  0.45
Kiepura 1999   14  0.5914  0.019  0.188  0.613  0.753  0.68
Korecka 1992   31  0.5555  0.0039  0.0649  0.0611  0.6032  0.19
Kushner 1990   41  0.5157  0.0036  0.1034  0.1028  0.2738  0.16
Lilamand 2001   57  0.4544  0.0060  0.0742  0.0715  0.3839  0.16
Luisada 1990   36  0.5430  0.0041  0.0741  0.0735  0.1151  0.09
Luisada 2008   54  0.4633  0.0055  0.0360  0.0342  0.0764  0.05
Lushtak 2004   7  0.6113  0.018  0.185  0.669  0.557  0.60
Malcuzynski 1951   39  0.5336  0.0038  0.0837  0.0833  0.1053  0.09
Malcuzynski 1961   2  0.651  0.341  0.333  0.754  0.692  0.72
Magaloff 1977   52  0.4756  0.0056  0.0362  0.0329  0.2054  0.08
Magin 1975   15  0.5816  0.0113  0.1020  0.4623  0.4219  0.44
Meguri 1997   45  0.5027  0.0045  0.0643  0.0617  0.4836  0.17
Milkina 1970   23  0.5711  0.0218  0.1116  0.4928  0.1927  0.31
Mohovich 1999   19  0.5838  0.0014  0.0915  0.5212  0.5211  0.52
Nezu 2005   29  0.5526  0.0042  0.0646  0.0638  0.0957  0.07
Ohlsson 1999   42  0.5135  0.0043  0.0740  0.0752  0.0661  0.06
Olejniczak 1990   27  0.5639  0.0022  0.1325  0.3423  0.4023  0.37
Osinska 1989   5  0.6110  0.026  0.206  0.6622  0.4210  0.53
Perlemuter 1992   62  0.3864  0.0063  0.0653  0.0625  0.2148  0.11
Poblocka 1999   18  0.589  0.0229  0.0828  0.2338  0.0943  0.14
Rangell 2001   38  0.5350  0.0046  0.0648  0.0620  0.4937  0.17
Richter 1960   24  0.5715  0.0130  0.1029  0.224  0.6622  0.38
Richter 1961   49  0.4820  0.0049  0.0645  0.0610  0.5434  0.18
Rosen 1989   33  0.5454  0.0033  0.1033  0.1025  0.3435  0.18
Rubinstein 1939   40  0.5234  0.0035  0.0738  0.0730  0.1749  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   34  0.5417  0.0112  0.0921  0.4020  0.4321  0.41
Rubinstein 1966   8  0.616  0.047  0.187  0.6112  0.588  0.59
Rudanovskaya 2007   48  0.4947  0.0052  0.0650  0.0621  0.3244  0.14
Shebanova 2002   26  0.5637  0.0032  0.0932  0.1713  0.5329  0.30
Smith 1975   50  0.4831  0.0044  0.0554  0.0537  0.0860  0.06
Sztompka 1959   43  0.5125  0.0037  0.0652  0.0625  0.3940  0.15
Tanyel 1992   44  0.5048  0.0047  0.0647  0.0635  0.0956  0.07
Tsujii 2005   9  0.6149  0.0017  0.1714  0.5540  0.0830  0.21
Uninsky 1959   17  0.5818  0.0123  0.1022  0.3826  0.2328  0.30
Vardi 1988   37  0.5343  0.0034  0.0935  0.0932  0.1946  0.13
Wasowski 1980   55  0.4562  0.0057  0.0361  0.0334  0.1259  0.06
Zimerman 1975   21  0.5819  0.0024  0.0823  0.3827  0.4520  0.41
Random 1   65  0.0166  0.0065  0.0265  0.029  0.3952  0.09
Random 2   64  0.0760  0.0064  0.0364  0.038  0.4350  0.11
Random 3   66  -0.0165  0.0066  0.0166  0.0138  0.0566  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).