Levy 1951

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   52  0.6619  0.0158  0.0542  0.0560  0.0351  0.04
Ashkenazy 1981   32  0.7240  0.0030  0.0929  0.1657  0.0432  0.08
Beliavsky 2004   55  0.6347  0.0061  0.0640  0.0663  0.0346  0.04
BenOr 1989   7  0.7831  0.008  0.096  0.5859  0.0417  0.15
Biret 1990   50  0.6749  0.0044  0.0449  0.0462  0.0364  0.03
Blet 2003   34  0.7153  0.0043  0.0452  0.0459  0.0448  0.04
Block 1995   45  0.6948  0.0054  0.0454  0.0445  0.0644  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   33  0.729  0.0412  0.0816  0.4121  0.261  0.33
Chiu 1999   41  0.7013  0.0222  0.0831  0.1549  0.0530  0.09
Clidat 1994   5  0.7914  0.024  0.145  0.6035  0.077  0.20
Cohen 1997   63  0.4921  0.0163  0.0541  0.0559  0.0457  0.04
Coop 1987   19  0.7545  0.0025  0.1420  0.3655  0.0523  0.13
Cortot 1951   54  0.6462  0.0057  0.0448  0.0461  0.0365  0.03
Czerny 1949   24  0.7350  0.0018  0.0914  0.4343  0.0615  0.16
Czerny 1949b   20  0.7425  0.0020  0.1613  0.4858  0.0419  0.14
Ezaki 2006   16  0.7639  0.0023  0.0918  0.3844  0.0713  0.16
Falvay 1989   29  0.725  0.0610  0.0924  0.3244  0.0716  0.15
Ferenczy 1958   51  0.6659  0.0041  0.0635  0.0654  0.0542  0.05
Fiorentino 1962   37  0.7157  0.0050  0.0361  0.0355  0.0558  0.04
Fliere 1977   4  0.803  0.105  0.167  0.5654  0.0510  0.17
Fou 1978   3  0.802  0.132  0.141  0.6950  0.059  0.19
Francois 1956   57  0.6226  0.0056  0.0451  0.0450  0.0559  0.04
Hatto 1997   56  0.6352  0.0045  0.0455  0.0437  0.0641  0.05
Horowitz 1971   43  0.7063  0.0053  0.0359  0.0360  0.0463  0.03
Horowitz 1985   60  0.6255  0.0060  0.0446  0.0446  0.0638  0.05
Indjic 2001   58  0.6258  0.0055  0.0357  0.0338  0.0654  0.04
Kapell 1951   2  0.801  0.211  0.213  0.6435  0.084  0.23
Kiepura 1999   59  0.6246  0.0062  0.0637  0.0661  0.0436  0.05
Kilenyi 1937   23  0.7427  0.0032  0.0832  0.1456  0.0433  0.07
Kissin 1993   14  0.7630  0.0024  0.0919  0.3764  0.0325  0.11
Kitain 1937   62  0.5228  0.0059  0.0447  0.0422  0.3027  0.11
Kushner 1990   8  0.7817  0.0115  0.0917  0.4042  0.0520  0.14
Levy 1951   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Luisada 1990   26  0.7333  0.0033  0.0634  0.0660  0.0352  0.04
Lushtak 2004   10  0.7736  0.0011  0.098  0.5260  0.0421  0.14
Lympany 1968   17  0.7642  0.0017  0.0915  0.4264  0.0324  0.11
Magaloff 1977   30  0.7251  0.0047  0.0363  0.0355  0.0549  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   28  0.7356  0.0046  0.0356  0.0355  0.0555  0.04
Magin 1975   38  0.7141  0.0040  0.0638  0.0652  0.0540  0.05
Milkina 1970   42  0.7043  0.0039  0.0543  0.0556  0.0445  0.04
Mohovich 1999   36  0.7166  0.0038  0.0633  0.0664  0.0356  0.04
Nadelmann 1956   21  0.747  0.0516  0.1021  0.3528  0.183  0.25
Ohlsson 1999   44  0.6932  0.0042  0.0450  0.0451  0.0547  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   35  0.7161  0.0049  0.0362  0.0353  0.0550  0.04
Olejniczak 1991   15  0.7664  0.0026  0.1022  0.3454  0.0522  0.13
Osinska 1989   11  0.7711  0.027  0.129  0.5156  0.0418  0.14
Paderewski 1912   40  0.7035  0.0051  0.0364  0.0360  0.0462  0.03
Perahia 1994   61  0.5720  0.0128  0.0928  0.1831  0.1712  0.17
Perlemuter 1986   49  0.6837  0.0052  0.0360  0.0364  0.0361  0.03
Poblocka 1999   6  0.796  0.066  0.164  0.6241  0.075  0.21
Rangell 2001   13  0.7744  0.0019  0.1210  0.5034  0.088  0.20
Risler 1920   22  0.7429  0.0034  0.0636  0.0643  0.0539  0.05
Rosen 1989   39  0.7054  0.0048  0.0453  0.0446  0.0553  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   53  0.6518  0.0136  0.0445  0.0436  0.0834  0.06
Rubinstein 1952   18  0.7510  0.0329  0.0826  0.1942  0.0529  0.10
Rubinstein 1966   31  0.7216  0.0127  0.0925  0.2337  0.0526  0.11
Rummel 1943   48  0.6815  0.0114  0.0923  0.3216  0.302  0.31
Shebanova 2002   25  0.7322  0.0035  0.0444  0.0436  0.0743  0.05
Smith 1975   9  0.7712  0.029  0.0912  0.4940  0.0514  0.16
Szpilman 1948   12  0.7723  0.0021  0.1711  0.4939  0.0611  0.17
Uninsky 1971   46  0.698  0.0513  0.1027  0.1953  0.0528  0.10
Wasowski 1980   47  0.6934  0.0037  0.0639  0.0653  0.0437  0.05
Weissenberg 1971   27  0.7324  0.0031  0.0630  0.1650  0.0531  0.09
Average   1  0.814  0.073  0.172  0.6447  0.066  0.20
Random 1    66  -0.1560  0.0066  0.0166  0.0127  0.1160  0.03
Random 2   64  0.0065  0.0064  0.0358  0.0364  0.0266  0.02
Random 3   65  -0.1238  0.0065  0.0265  0.0219  0.2035  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).