Falvay 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   53  0.7251  0.0053  0.0559  0.0553  0.0555  0.05
Ashkenazy 1981   35  0.8042  0.0042  0.0842  0.0836  0.0745  0.07
Beliavsky 2004   46  0.7564  0.0050  0.0650  0.0633  0.1042  0.08
BenOr 1989   12  0.893  0.085  0.173  0.674  0.644  0.65
Biret 1990   56  0.679  0.0152  0.0558  0.0563  0.0363  0.04
Blet 2003   31  0.8247  0.0038  0.1134  0.1141  0.0643  0.08
Block 1995   13  0.8927  0.0017  0.1417  0.422  0.5912  0.50
Brailowsky 1960   49  0.7428  0.0049  0.0651  0.0631  0.1441  0.09
Chiu 1999   4  0.9336  0.004  0.169  0.527  0.567  0.54
Clidat 1994   28  0.8310  0.0125  0.0925  0.2525  0.2031  0.22
Cohen 1997   60  0.5235  0.0059  0.0461  0.0462  0.0461  0.04
Coop 1987   1  0.951  0.451  0.441  0.718  0.633  0.67
Cortot 1951   34  0.8124  0.0041  0.0746  0.077  0.4932  0.19
Czerny 1949   40  0.788  0.0214  0.1318  0.3918  0.3918  0.39
Czerny 1949b   30  0.8223  0.0019  0.0923  0.3026  0.2823  0.29
Ezaki 2006   2  0.952  0.122  0.356  0.649  0.595  0.61
Falvay 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Ferenczy 1958   33  0.8143  0.0026  0.0826  0.206  0.5322  0.33
Fiorentino 1962   17  0.8862  0.0011  0.1214  0.4813  0.4515  0.46
Fliere 1977   23  0.8625  0.0021  0.1019  0.3629  0.1828  0.25
Fou 1978   6  0.925  0.049  0.145  0.664  0.692  0.67
Francois 1956   48  0.7433  0.0045  0.0747  0.0737  0.0746  0.07
Hatto 1997   42  0.7822  0.0039  0.0743  0.0724  0.2539  0.13
Horowitz 1971   52  0.7252  0.0054  0.0745  0.0753  0.0550  0.06
Horowitz 1985   61  0.4659  0.0063  0.0553  0.0564  0.0457  0.04
Indjic 2001   41  0.7817  0.0140  0.0839  0.0824  0.2538  0.14
Kapell 1951   10  0.9118  0.0115  0.1216  0.4612  0.5410  0.50
Kiepura 1999   27  0.8532  0.0031  0.0732  0.1513  0.4625  0.26
Kilenyi 1937   11  0.9055  0.0012  0.1113  0.4912  0.4814  0.48
Kissin 1993   7  0.9263  0.0013  0.138  0.5221  0.2917  0.39
Kitain 1937   63  0.2966  0.0062  0.0463  0.0462  0.0462  0.04
Kushner 1990   50  0.7354  0.0047  0.0556  0.0562  0.0358  0.04
Levy 1951   51  0.7214  0.0144  0.0744  0.0724  0.3237  0.15
Luisada 1990   26  0.8557  0.0033  0.0936  0.0923  0.2736  0.16
Lushtak 2004   16  0.8945  0.0022  0.0920  0.3619  0.3820  0.37
Lympany 1968   32  0.8119  0.0137  0.0841  0.0829  0.1640  0.11
Magaloff 1977   21  0.8734  0.0028  0.0928  0.1923  0.2630  0.22
Magaloff 1977b   22  0.8758  0.0029  0.0929  0.1829  0.1934  0.18
Magin 1975   5  0.9231  0.0010  0.1210  0.5212  0.586  0.55
Milkina 1970   44  0.7729  0.0051  0.0840  0.0861  0.0448  0.06
Mohovich 1999   47  0.7450  0.0046  0.0648  0.0645  0.0649  0.06
Nadelmann 1956   57  0.6546  0.0058  0.0649  0.0656  0.0453  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   24  0.8641  0.0027  0.0727  0.2017  0.3824  0.28
Olejniczac 1990   18  0.8812  0.018  0.1411  0.5213  0.4811  0.50
Olejniczak 1991   15  0.8916  0.0116  0.127  0.5313  0.489  0.50
Osinska 1989   29  0.8320  0.0136  0.0937  0.0948  0.0544  0.07
Paderewski 1912   37  0.7915  0.0134  0.1233  0.1221  0.2833  0.18
Perahia 1994   62  0.4253  0.0061  0.0462  0.0455  0.0560  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   43  0.7839  0.0020  0.1324  0.2525  0.2726  0.26
Poblocka 1999   3  0.934  0.063  0.324  0.677  0.701  0.68
Rangell 2001   9  0.9111  0.0118  0.2115  0.4712  0.5313  0.50
Risler 1920   36  0.8049  0.0035  0.1135  0.1121  0.4529  0.22
Rosen 1989   19  0.8837  0.0023  0.0822  0.336  0.5316  0.42
Rubinstein 1939   59  0.5348  0.0060  0.0652  0.0658  0.0451  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   45  0.7661  0.0048  0.0557  0.0558  0.0464  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   55  0.6940  0.0056  0.0555  0.0535  0.0654  0.05
Rummel 1943   58  0.6238  0.0057  0.0554  0.0560  0.0359  0.04
Shebanova 2002   20  0.8830  0.0024  0.1121  0.3314  0.4419  0.38
Smith 1975   38  0.7913  0.0143  0.0838  0.0842  0.0547  0.06
Szpilman 1948   39  0.7926  0.0032  0.0831  0.1525  0.2035  0.17
Uninsky 1971   25  0.867  0.0230  0.0730  0.1810  0.3827  0.26
Wasowski 1980   54  0.7156  0.0055  0.0460  0.0461  0.0456  0.04
Weissenberg 1971   14  0.8944  0.006  0.1512  0.5012  0.558  0.52
Average   8  0.916  0.037  0.132  0.6830  0.1921  0.36
Random 1    65  -0.0665  0.0065  0.0265  0.0225  0.1352  0.05
Random 2   64  0.0760  0.0064  0.0364  0.0347  0.0465  0.03
Random 3   66  -0.1721  0.0066  0.0166  0.0131  0.0966  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).