Kiepura 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   50  0.7515  0.0135  0.0734  0.0741  0.0737  0.07
Ashkenazy 1981   29  0.8130  0.0033  0.0547  0.0550  0.0555  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   24  0.8236  0.0030  0.0828  0.2827  0.1814  0.22
BenOr 1989   15  0.8532  0.0016  0.1212  0.4741  0.0623  0.17
Biret 1990   53  0.7264  0.0053  0.0642  0.0655  0.0456  0.05
Blet 2003   41  0.7821  0.0140  0.0637  0.0658  0.0450  0.05
Block 1995   31  0.8031  0.0031  0.1031  0.2529  0.2113  0.23
Brailowsky 1960   51  0.7561  0.0054  0.0638  0.0652  0.0544  0.05
Chiu 1999   32  0.7919  0.0115  0.0923  0.3738  0.0919  0.18
Clidat 1994   34  0.7957  0.0032  0.1132  0.2254  0.0533  0.10
Cohen 1997   61  0.5741  0.0057  0.0463  0.0423  0.1735  0.08
Coop 1987   25  0.8113  0.0221  0.1110  0.4835  0.1112  0.23
Cortot 1951   48  0.7629  0.0052  0.0557  0.0551  0.0463  0.04
Czerny 1949   27  0.8116  0.0126  0.1024  0.3634  0.0725  0.16
Czerny 1949b   18  0.8339  0.0023  0.0727  0.3360  0.0431  0.11
Ezaki 2006   16  0.8435  0.0017  0.167  0.5150  0.0620  0.17
Falvay 1989   14  0.853  0.125  0.1513  0.4632  0.159  0.26
Ferenczy 1958   55  0.6944  0.0048  0.0554  0.0555  0.0552  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   2  0.884  0.112  0.164  0.5819  0.322  0.43
Fliere 1977   7  0.868  0.047  0.116  0.5343  0.0618  0.18
Fou 1978   17  0.8422  0.0119  0.1114  0.4648  0.0621  0.17
Francois 1956   38  0.7842  0.0036  0.0458  0.0453  0.0465  0.04
Hatto 1997   42  0.7747  0.0037  0.0553  0.0540  0.0651  0.05
Horowitz 1971   46  0.7637  0.0051  0.0548  0.0559  0.0462  0.04
Horowitz 1985   60  0.6051  0.0062  0.0636  0.0650  0.0543  0.05
Indjic 2001   43  0.7760  0.0038  0.0545  0.0539  0.0653  0.05
Kapell 1951   44  0.7725  0.0143  0.0544  0.0550  0.0648  0.05
Kiepura 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kilenyi 1937   30  0.8045  0.0024  0.0819  0.4241  0.0722  0.17
Kissin 1993   23  0.8327  0.0020  0.0916  0.4458  0.0429  0.13
Kitain 1937   63  0.3749  0.0063  0.0549  0.0561  0.0461  0.04
Kushner 1990   52  0.7454  0.0049  0.0556  0.0549  0.0458  0.04
Levy 1951   59  0.6262  0.0059  0.0461  0.0437  0.0646  0.05
Luisada 1990   6  0.8624  0.0114  0.129  0.4834  0.0817  0.20
Lushtak 2004   10  0.8528  0.0018  0.0822  0.3941  0.0627  0.15
Lympany 1968   37  0.7923  0.0141  0.0555  0.0544  0.0541  0.05
Magaloff 1977   9  0.856  0.0411  0.1220  0.4029  0.217  0.29
Magaloff 1977b   12  0.8518  0.0112  0.1121  0.3931  0.1611  0.25
Magin 1975   5  0.867  0.048  0.122  0.5923  0.431  0.50
Milkina 1970   28  0.8138  0.0047  0.0635  0.0648  0.0549  0.05
Mohovich 1999   40  0.7865  0.0046  0.0640  0.0651  0.0554  0.05
Nadelmann 1956   57  0.6658  0.0058  0.0364  0.0364  0.0366  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   47  0.7626  0.0142  0.0550  0.0557  0.0457  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   3  0.8712  0.023  0.175  0.5720  0.306  0.41
Olejniczak 1991   8  0.8620  0.019  0.108  0.5031  0.1410  0.26
Osinska 1989   21  0.8311  0.0228  0.0929  0.2760  0.0432  0.10
Paderewski 1912   13  0.8510  0.0210  0.1111  0.4712  0.384  0.42
Perahia 1994   62  0.5655  0.0061  0.0459  0.0446  0.0560  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   20  0.8343  0.0013  0.1418  0.4351  0.0526  0.15
Poblocka 1999   19  0.8333  0.0025  0.0915  0.4551  0.0624  0.16
Rangell 2001   35  0.7934  0.0039  0.0460  0.0433  0.0940  0.06
Risler 1920   54  0.7266  0.0050  0.0639  0.0648  0.0545  0.05
Rosen 1989   22  0.8317  0.0122  0.1126  0.3523  0.228  0.28
Rubinstein 1939   56  0.6840  0.0056  0.0641  0.0644  0.0638  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   39  0.7859  0.0044  0.0546  0.0559  0.0464  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   49  0.7563  0.0055  0.0933  0.0942  0.0536  0.07
Rummel 1943   58  0.6556  0.0060  0.0643  0.0663  0.0359  0.04
Shebanova 2002   11  0.852  0.134  0.143  0.5920  0.303  0.42
Smith 1975   33  0.7952  0.0045  0.0551  0.0544  0.0547  0.05
Szpilman 1948   26  0.8150  0.0027  0.1225  0.3540  0.0628  0.14
Uninsky 1971   4  0.879  0.036  0.1317  0.439  0.405  0.41
Wasowski 1980   36  0.795  0.0534  0.0552  0.0534  0.0642  0.05
Weissenberg 1971   45  0.7614  0.0129  0.0930  0.2731  0.1516  0.20
Average   1  0.891  0.181  0.181  0.6741  0.0715  0.22
Random 1    65  -0.0848  0.0065  0.0265  0.029  0.3634  0.08
Random 2   64  0.1053  0.0064  0.0462  0.043  0.4130  0.13
Random 3   66  -0.1146  0.0066  0.0166  0.017  0.3639  0.06

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).