Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   2  0.1634  0.0016  0.0817  0.2354  0.0417  0.10
Ashkenazy 1981   12  0.1035  0.0013  0.076  0.3760  0.048  0.12
Beliavsky 2004   61  -0.0323  0.0061  0.0356  0.0358  0.0454  0.03
BenOr 1989   53  0.0140  0.0060  0.0259  0.0262  0.0365  0.02
Biret 1990   4  0.1414  0.0115  0.0816  0.2357  0.0419  0.10
Blet 2003   22  0.0913  0.0124  0.0613  0.2560  0.0415  0.10
Block 1995   40  0.0620  0.0146  0.0536  0.0562  0.0447  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   63  -0.0452  0.0064  0.0262  0.0263  0.0360  0.02
Chiu 1999   16  0.1010  0.025  0.127  0.3562  0.046  0.12
Clidat 1994   57  0.0062  0.0053  0.0355  0.0363  0.0356  0.03
Cohen 1997   1  0.241  0.231  0.221  0.4959  0.042  0.14
Coop 1987   25  0.0855  0.0021  0.0519  0.2262  0.0421  0.09
Cortot 1951   50  0.0216  0.0156  0.0354  0.0362  0.0358  0.03
Czerny 1949   60  -0.0263  0.0047  0.0448  0.0463  0.0445  0.04
Czerny 1949b   59  -0.0261  0.0048  0.0440  0.0461  0.0441  0.04
Ezaki 2006   29  0.0739  0.0037  0.0538  0.0560  0.0434  0.04
Falvay 1989   34  0.0747  0.0043  0.0445  0.0463  0.0439  0.04
Ferenczy 1958   19  0.1032  0.0036  0.0441  0.0462  0.0443  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   24  0.0933  0.008  0.129  0.3061  0.0412  0.11
Fliere 1977   36  0.0656  0.0042  0.0447  0.0462  0.0436  0.04
Fou 1978   47  0.0457  0.0052  0.0357  0.0363  0.0352  0.03
Francois 1956   62  -0.0431  0.0058  0.0350  0.0361  0.0359  0.03
Hatto 1997   8  0.1159  0.0012  0.0512  0.2663  0.0416  0.10
Horowitz 1971   15  0.1048  0.0025  0.0526  0.1462  0.0431  0.07
Horowitz 1985   5  0.1212  0.0114  0.0620  0.2161  0.0420  0.09
Indjic 2001   6  0.1246  0.0010  0.0611  0.2863  0.0411  0.11
Kapell 1951   52  0.0158  0.0049  0.0449  0.0462  0.0353  0.03
Kiepura 1999   17  0.105  0.047  0.103  0.4261  0.043  0.13
Kilenyi 1937   31  0.0737  0.0011  0.0610  0.2960  0.049  0.11
Kissin 1993   9  0.1143  0.0023  0.0515  0.2361  0.0414  0.10
Kitain 1937   64  -0.0621  0.0162  0.0264  0.0262  0.0457  0.03
Kushner 1990   28  0.0719  0.0131  0.0530  0.1058  0.0432  0.06
Levy 1951   55  0.0038  0.0063  0.0263  0.0257  0.0361  0.02
Luisada 1990   44  0.0429  0.0030  0.0628  0.1358  0.0430  0.07
Lushtak 2004   30  0.0754  0.0039  0.0534  0.0560  0.0446  0.04
Lympany 1968   10  0.1122  0.0033  0.0535  0.0558  0.0435  0.04
Magaloff 1977   35  0.0649  0.0026  0.0721  0.1962  0.0422  0.09
Magaloff 1977b   38  0.0651  0.0027  0.0523  0.1862  0.0427  0.08
Magin 1975   27  0.0850  0.0029  0.0625  0.1662  0.0423  0.08
Milkina 1970   26  0.0844  0.0017  0.0924  0.1759  0.0425  0.08
Mohovich 1999   46  0.0415  0.0132  0.0531  0.1058  0.0433  0.06
Nadelmann 1956   45  0.0430  0.0051  0.0353  0.0360  0.0455  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   20  0.102  0.203  0.265  0.3861  0.047  0.12
Olejniczac 1990   23  0.099  0.036  0.128  0.3160  0.0410  0.11
Olejniczak 1991   14  0.1027  0.0022  0.0718  0.2362  0.0413  0.10
Osinska 1989   32  0.0728  0.0038  0.0537  0.0557  0.0437  0.04
Paderewski 1912   39  0.0626  0.0020  0.0422  0.1858  0.0426  0.08
Perahia 1994   56  0.0036  0.0054  0.0258  0.0263  0.0364  0.02
Perlemuter 1986   54  0.0060  0.0041  0.0444  0.0462  0.0442  0.04
Poblocka 1999   48  0.0365  0.0045  0.0533  0.0560  0.0438  0.04
Rangell 2001   37  0.0641  0.0044  0.0443  0.0461  0.0448  0.04
Risler 1920   41  0.0511  0.0135  0.0446  0.0462  0.0350  0.03
Rosen 1989   18  0.108  0.039  0.0914  0.2461  0.0418  0.10
Rubinstein 1939   42  0.0542  0.0055  0.0352  0.0359  0.0451  0.03
Rubinstein 1952   3  0.143  0.172  0.252  0.4548  0.045  0.13
Rubinstein 1966   13  0.1024  0.0018  0.0727  0.1356  0.0429  0.07
Rummel 1943   65  -0.0853  0.0057  0.0260  0.0261  0.0363  0.02
Shebanova 2002   21  0.0925  0.0034  0.0442  0.0461  0.0444  0.04
Smith 1975   33  0.0717  0.0140  0.0439  0.0463  0.0440  0.04
Szpilman 1948   43  0.0445  0.0050  0.0351  0.0360  0.0449  0.03
Uninsky 1971   58  -0.0164  0.0059  0.0261  0.0263  0.0362  0.02
Wasowski 1980   49  0.0218  0.0128  0.0529  0.1357  0.0428  0.07
Weissenberg 1971   11  0.104  0.054  0.124  0.4060  0.044  0.13
Random 1    51  0.017  0.0365  0.0265  0.0210  0.3524  0.08
Random 2   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Random 3   7  0.126  0.0419  0.0532  0.091  0.731  0.26

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).