Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   62  0.3549  0.0035  0.0560  0.0530  0.2434  0.11
Ax 1995   22  0.539  0.0110  0.217  0.6611  0.537  0.59
Bacha 1998   41  0.4753  0.0041  0.0650  0.0618  0.4232  0.16
Barbosa 1983   54  0.4233  0.0034  0.0559  0.0557  0.0558  0.05
BenOr 1989   50  0.4550  0.0052  0.0838  0.0845  0.0648  0.07
Biret 1990   16  0.555  0.0216  0.1313  0.5919  0.4613  0.52
Brailowsky 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Chiu 1999   40  0.4838  0.0040  0.0743  0.0717  0.5027  0.19
Clidat 1994   44  0.4642  0.0039  0.0842  0.0839  0.0742  0.07
Cohen 1997   64  0.2858  0.0064  0.0556  0.0556  0.0465  0.04
Cortot 1951   51  0.4261  0.0060  0.0652  0.0635  0.0754  0.06
Csalog 1996   26  0.5247  0.0031  0.0928  0.2563  0.0435  0.10
Czerny 1989   12  0.5627  0.0018  0.1719  0.5525  0.3516  0.44
Ezaki 2006   39  0.4863  0.0047  0.0837  0.0854  0.0550  0.06
Falvay 1989   2  0.6110  0.012  0.403  0.7524  0.418  0.55
Fiorentino 1962   21  0.5340  0.0015  0.1318  0.5528  0.2920  0.40
Fliere 1977   25  0.5218  0.0023  0.1723  0.4520  0.4515  0.45
Fou 1978   28  0.5223  0.0024  0.1125  0.3738  0.0829  0.17
Francois 1956   9  0.576  0.015  0.225  0.702  0.791  0.74
Goldenweiser 1946   29  0.5220  0.0026  0.1126  0.327  0.5717  0.43
Gornostaeva 1994   55  0.4046  0.0055  0.0649  0.0637  0.0847  0.07
Groot 1988   6  0.5913  0.0012  0.1510  0.6224  0.3914  0.49
Hatto 1993   37  0.4854  0.0045  0.0648  0.0662  0.0562  0.05
Hatto 1997   48  0.4656  0.0051  0.0936  0.0961  0.0452  0.06
Horszowski 1983   60  0.3662  0.0058  0.0463  0.0437  0.0755  0.05
Indjic 2001   42  0.4765  0.0050  0.1134  0.1156  0.0546  0.07
Katin 1996   23  0.5329  0.0025  0.1324  0.3740  0.0831  0.17
Kiepura 1999   46  0.4645  0.0044  0.0841  0.0837  0.1037  0.09
Korecka 1992   33  0.5043  0.0030  0.0733  0.1714  0.5425  0.30
Kushner 1990   7  0.587  0.018  0.1411  0.627  0.635  0.62
Lilamand 2001   63  0.3251  0.0062  0.0462  0.0452  0.0563  0.04
Luisada 1990   47  0.4637  0.0046  0.0840  0.0848  0.0743  0.07
Luisada 2008   59  0.3831  0.0054  0.0653  0.0655  0.0559  0.05
Lushtak 2004   35  0.4930  0.0033  0.1031  0.1944  0.0733  0.12
Malcuzynski 1951   30  0.518  0.0128  0.0732  0.1752  0.0636  0.10
Malcuzynski 1961   17  0.5526  0.0021  0.1122  0.4646  0.0630  0.17
Magaloff 1977   27  0.5224  0.0027  0.0927  0.2714  0.5221  0.37
Magin 1975   5  0.603  0.023  0.282  0.755  0.653  0.70
Meguri 1997   57  0.4025  0.0059  0.0561  0.0556  0.0557  0.05
Milkina 1970   8  0.5721  0.004  0.199  0.6417  0.459  0.54
Mohovich 1999   20  0.5422  0.0019  0.1317  0.5623  0.2919  0.40
Nezu 2005   34  0.5059  0.0042  0.0651  0.0647  0.0844  0.07
Ohlsson 1999   11  0.5612  0.0111  0.1314  0.5820  0.4612  0.52
Olejniczak 1990   38  0.4852  0.0048  0.0839  0.0850  0.0649  0.07
Osinska 1989   32  0.5148  0.0038  0.0747  0.0746  0.0740  0.07
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.3655  0.0063  0.0555  0.0552  0.0556  0.05
Poblocka 1999   18  0.5457  0.0022  0.1521  0.4642  0.0826  0.19
Rangell 2001   58  0.3832  0.0061  0.0464  0.0455  0.0466  0.04
Richter 1960   52  0.4219  0.0057  0.0558  0.0535  0.0751  0.06
Richter 1961   56  0.4041  0.0053  0.0746  0.0735  0.0938  0.08
Rosen 1989   36  0.4934  0.0043  0.0745  0.0738  0.0745  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   19  0.5415  0.0014  0.1215  0.5723  0.4810  0.52
Rubinstein 1952   15  0.5511  0.019  0.158  0.6612  0.604  0.63
Rubinstein 1966   13  0.5628  0.0017  0.1916  0.5728  0.3118  0.42
Rudanovskaya 2007   31  0.5135  0.0032  0.0929  0.216  0.5324  0.33
Shebanova 2002   53  0.4244  0.0056  0.0557  0.0553  0.0560  0.05
Smith 1975   10  0.5716  0.0013  0.1212  0.6214  0.586  0.60
Sztompka 1959   3  0.614  0.026  0.204  0.703  0.752  0.72
Tanyel 1992   45  0.4636  0.0049  0.0935  0.0946  0.0739  0.08
Tsujii 2005   14  0.5639  0.0020  0.1220  0.4950  0.0728  0.19
Uninsky 1959   4  0.612  0.047  0.206  0.6721  0.4011  0.52
Vardi 1988   43  0.4717  0.0037  0.0744  0.0742  0.0841  0.07
Wasowski 1980   24  0.5314  0.0029  0.0630  0.2010  0.5823  0.34
Zimerman 1975   49  0.4660  0.0036  0.0554  0.0540  0.0853  0.06
Average   1  0.691  0.781  0.771  0.9236  0.1322  0.35
Random 1   66  -0.0166  0.0066  0.0266  0.0229  0.1461  0.05
Random 2   67  -0.0264  0.0067  0.0167  0.0163  0.0367  0.02
Random 3   65  -0.0167  0.0065  0.0365  0.0340  0.0564  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).