Rosen 1989

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   48  0.7529  0.0048  0.0636  0.0644  0.0645  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   42  0.7739  0.0053  0.0553  0.0559  0.0462  0.04
Beliavsky 2004   43  0.7758  0.0034  0.0543  0.0531  0.1333  0.08
BenOr 1989   12  0.8518  0.0113  0.149  0.4233  0.1113  0.21
Biret 1990   54  0.7334  0.0050  0.0460  0.0445  0.0563  0.04
Blet 2003   20  0.8313  0.0217  0.0912  0.3750  0.0523  0.14
Block 1995   34  0.8163  0.0036  0.0457  0.0422  0.3529  0.12
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.7632  0.0047  0.0639  0.0635  0.0741  0.06
Chiu 1999   14  0.8550  0.0015  0.1114  0.3331  0.1412  0.21
Clidat 1994   8  0.865  0.054  0.153  0.5617  0.313  0.42
Cohen 1997   61  0.5753  0.0062  0.0463  0.0439  0.0656  0.05
Coop 1987   6  0.872  0.107  0.275  0.5428  0.224  0.34
Cortot 1951   36  0.8056  0.0043  0.0642  0.0612  0.4319  0.16
Czerny 1949   46  0.7657  0.0042  0.0548  0.0547  0.0554  0.05
Czerny 1949b   40  0.7946  0.0044  0.0833  0.0859  0.0442  0.06
Ezaki 2006   3  0.8911  0.025  0.154  0.5428  0.176  0.30
Falvay 1989   4  0.8814  0.016  0.256  0.5322  0.332  0.42
Ferenczy 1958   44  0.7651  0.0041  0.0550  0.0533  0.1039  0.07
Fiorentino 1962   21  0.8365  0.0025  0.0718  0.3042  0.0724  0.14
Fliere 1977   15  0.8461  0.0028  0.0820  0.2752  0.0527  0.12
Fou 1978   2  0.891  0.271  0.272  0.5912  0.491  0.54
Francois 1956   49  0.7523  0.0126  0.0728  0.1631  0.1325  0.14
Hatto 1997   53  0.7460  0.0051  0.0461  0.0444  0.0558  0.04
Horowitz 1971   28  0.828  0.0332  0.0729  0.1423  0.2615  0.19
Horowitz 1985   60  0.617  0.0435  0.0554  0.0544  0.0648  0.05
Indjic 2001   52  0.7433  0.0052  0.0455  0.0444  0.0560  0.04
Kapell 1951   22  0.8316  0.0110  0.1121  0.2736  0.0820  0.15
Kiepura 1999   24  0.8338  0.0023  0.0523  0.2226  0.358  0.28
Kilenyi 1937   9  0.8648  0.0011  0.1310  0.4137  0.0816  0.18
Kissin 1993   5  0.8825  0.019  0.187  0.4746  0.0617  0.17
Kitain 1937   63  0.4824  0.0159  0.0459  0.0429  0.1834  0.08
Kushner 1990   41  0.7840  0.0020  0.0630  0.1263  0.0343  0.06
Levy 1951   56  0.7054  0.0057  0.0546  0.0553  0.0457  0.04
Luisada 1990   16  0.8436  0.0027  0.0822  0.2638  0.0726  0.13
Lushtak 2004   7  0.8744  0.008  0.118  0.4732  0.1310  0.25
Lympany 1968   29  0.8219  0.0131  0.0726  0.1633  0.0830  0.11
Magaloff 1977   10  0.8549  0.0029  0.1024  0.1939  0.0728  0.12
Magaloff 1977b   13  0.8547  0.0030  0.0827  0.1641  0.0731  0.11
Magin 1975   37  0.8064  0.0046  0.0638  0.0633  0.0937  0.07
Milkina 1970   32  0.814  0.0819  0.0732  0.1155  0.0438  0.07
Mohovich 1999   51  0.7455  0.0049  0.0552  0.0561  0.0361  0.04
Nadelmann 1956   57  0.6912  0.0260  0.0456  0.0462  0.0365  0.03
Ohlsson 1999   45  0.7627  0.0054  0.0545  0.0550  0.0552  0.05
Olejniczac 1990   19  0.8352  0.0022  0.0616  0.3138  0.0721  0.15
Olejniczak 1991   27  0.8241  0.0037  0.0544  0.0537  0.0936  0.07
Osinska 1989   31  0.8115  0.0121  0.0631  0.1164  0.0340  0.06
Paderewski 1912   35  0.809  0.0312  0.1217  0.3116  0.325  0.31
Perahia 1994   62  0.4922  0.0163  0.0640  0.0641  0.0646  0.06
Perlemuter 1986   26  0.823  0.103  0.1311  0.3729  0.189  0.26
Poblocka 1999   11  0.8531  0.0016  0.1015  0.3347  0.0622  0.14
Rangell 2001   25  0.8228  0.0038  0.0637  0.0636  0.0747  0.06
Risler 1920   39  0.7917  0.0139  0.0547  0.0533  0.0935  0.07
Rosen 1989   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Rubinstein 1939   59  0.6237  0.0061  0.0458  0.0442  0.0651  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   18  0.8410  0.0218  0.0819  0.3021  0.317  0.30
Rubinstein 1966   50  0.7420  0.0155  0.0641  0.0649  0.0453  0.05
Rummel 1943   58  0.6842  0.0056  0.0549  0.0545  0.0459  0.04
Shebanova 2002   33  0.8135  0.0045  0.0834  0.0863  0.0444  0.06
Smith 1975   30  0.8143  0.0040  0.0551  0.0546  0.0550  0.05
Szpilman 1948   38  0.7921  0.0133  0.0635  0.0655  0.0449  0.05
Uninsky 1971   23  0.8345  0.0024  0.0525  0.1927  0.1518  0.17
Wasowski 1980   55  0.7126  0.0058  0.0464  0.0463  0.0364  0.03
Weissenberg 1971   17  0.8430  0.0014  0.0813  0.3329  0.1811  0.24
Average   1  0.906  0.052  0.151  0.5948  0.0614  0.19
Random 1    65  -0.1066  0.0065  0.0265  0.0255  0.0266  0.02
Random 2   64  0.1059  0.0064  0.0462  0.0414  0.2432  0.10
Random 3   66  -0.1562  0.0066  0.0166  0.0115  0.2255  0.05

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).