Horowitz 1971

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   18  0.662  0.093  0.1312  0.4828  0.279  0.36
Ashkenazy 1981   33  0.6336  0.0039  0.0646  0.0652  0.0651  0.06
Beliavsky 2004   57  0.5741  0.0032  0.0932  0.1829  0.1420  0.16
BenOr 1989   12  0.6628  0.0018  0.0921  0.4055  0.0531  0.14
Biret 1990   2  0.7111  0.016  0.124  0.598  0.502  0.54
Blet 2003   31  0.6339  0.0031  0.0930  0.1962  0.0437  0.09
Block 1995   41  0.6126  0.0043  0.0558  0.0558  0.0463  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   28  0.6425  0.0044  0.0459  0.0419  0.4333  0.13
Chiu 1999   53  0.5942  0.0048  0.0645  0.0639  0.0738  0.06
Clidat 1994   3  0.7010  0.018  0.137  0.5440  0.0618  0.18
Cohen 1997   61  0.4860  0.0062  0.0644  0.0621  0.3827  0.15
Coop 1987   40  0.6247  0.0040  0.0736  0.0745  0.0645  0.06
Cortot 1951   55  0.5835  0.0061  0.0553  0.0521  0.3434  0.13
Czerny 1949   30  0.6337  0.0020  0.0916  0.4443  0.0623  0.16
Czerny 1949b   25  0.6519  0.0114  0.109  0.5144  0.0619  0.17
Ezaki 2006   21  0.6534  0.0028  0.1127  0.3049  0.0632  0.13
Falvay 1989   56  0.5849  0.0058  0.0642  0.0653  0.0640  0.06
Ferenczy 1958   58  0.5632  0.0056  0.0462  0.0440  0.0757  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   45  0.6154  0.0053  0.0550  0.0555  0.0660  0.05
Fliere 1977   22  0.6538  0.0027  0.1225  0.3250  0.0725  0.15
Fou 1978   42  0.6143  0.0042  0.0556  0.0542  0.0843  0.06
Francois 1956   51  0.6055  0.0041  0.0554  0.0536  0.0661  0.05
Hatto 1997   52  0.5965  0.0034  0.0639  0.0655  0.0556  0.05
Horowitz 1971   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Horowitz 1985   1  0.751  0.451  0.441  0.821  0.911  0.86
Indjic 2001   54  0.5933  0.0035  0.0648  0.0655  0.0649  0.06
Kapell 1951   47  0.6059  0.0049  0.0640  0.0645  0.0644  0.06
Kiepura 1999   20  0.6621  0.0029  0.1129  0.2135  0.0735  0.12
Kilenyi 1937   32  0.6317  0.0125  0.1123  0.3958  0.0530  0.14
Kissin 1993   7  0.6815  0.019  0.103  0.5937  0.0914  0.23
Kitain 1937   62  0.4723  0.0038  0.0643  0.061  0.6716  0.20
Kushner 1990   9  0.6727  0.0012  0.0811  0.4937  0.0717  0.19
Levy 1951   59  0.5653  0.0059  0.0649  0.0642  0.0639  0.06
Luisada 1990   10  0.6724  0.0026  0.1028  0.2452  0.0636  0.12
Lushtak 2004   14  0.6645  0.0013  0.0913  0.4756  0.0526  0.15
Lympany 1968   8  0.686  0.0411  0.118  0.5321  0.374  0.44
Magaloff 1977   26  0.6457  0.0047  0.0557  0.0538  0.0747  0.06
Magaloff 1977b   37  0.6262  0.0054  0.0552  0.0537  0.0850  0.06
Magin 1975   36  0.6240  0.0050  0.0641  0.0652  0.0555  0.05
Milkina 1970   17  0.668  0.0310  0.1110  0.5125  0.277  0.37
Mohovich 1999   19  0.6631  0.0022  0.0922  0.4032  0.1512  0.24
Nadelmann 1956   6  0.695  0.067  0.132  0.6317  0.295  0.43
Ohlsson 1999   35  0.6330  0.0033  0.0734  0.0747  0.0646  0.06
Olejniczac 1990   39  0.6252  0.0052  0.0833  0.0856  0.0548  0.06
Olejniczak 1991   38  0.6250  0.0051  0.0637  0.0646  0.0741  0.06
Osinska 1989   4  0.704  0.072  0.156  0.5644  0.0815  0.21
Paderewski 1912   29  0.6422  0.0024  0.0924  0.3723  0.2011  0.27
Perahia 1994   24  0.653  0.084  0.1218  0.427  0.583  0.49
Perlemuter 1986   44  0.6164  0.0046  0.0461  0.0457  0.0562  0.04
Poblocka 1999   5  0.697  0.035  0.145  0.5936  0.0913  0.23
Rangell 2001   48  0.6029  0.0037  0.0735  0.0739  0.0652  0.06
Risler 1920   60  0.5558  0.0060  0.0460  0.0448  0.0654  0.05
Rosen 1989   50  0.6051  0.0057  0.0555  0.0548  0.0659  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   34  0.6344  0.0036  0.0638  0.0622  0.3329  0.14
Rubinstein 1952   13  0.669  0.0216  0.0914  0.4536  0.0624  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   15  0.6620  0.0121  0.0815  0.4419  0.396  0.41
Rummel 1943   43  0.6116  0.0130  0.0831  0.198  0.4210  0.28
Shebanova 2002   11  0.6713  0.0119  0.0819  0.4144  0.0622  0.16
Smith 1975   16  0.6618  0.0123  0.1120  0.4149  0.0528  0.14
Szpilman 1948   46  0.6061  0.0055  0.0551  0.0545  0.0653  0.05
Uninsky 1971   27  0.6412  0.0115  0.0917  0.4443  0.0621  0.16
Wasowski 1980   23  0.6514  0.0117  0.0826  0.3216  0.408  0.36
Weissenberg 1971   49  0.6048  0.0045  0.0647  0.0648  0.0642  0.06
Random 1    65  -0.0463  0.0064  0.0264  0.0249  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   63  0.0346  0.0063  0.0463  0.0437  0.0658  0.05
Random 3   64  -0.0456  0.0065  0.0265  0.0252  0.0464  0.03

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).