Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   43  0.3317  0.0132  0.0532  0.1027  0.1727  0.13
Ashkenazy 1981   34  0.3618  0.0134  0.0451  0.0444  0.0655  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   23  0.3811  0.0126  0.0725  0.2411  0.5312  0.36
BenOr 1989   16  0.418  0.0116  0.1514  0.4541  0.0821  0.19
Biret 1990   19  0.4052  0.0021  0.0922  0.3354  0.0528  0.13
Blet 2003   26  0.3847  0.0037  0.0639  0.0639  0.0744  0.06
Block 1995   13  0.4214  0.0115  0.1112  0.4918  0.347  0.41
Brailowsky 1960   51  0.3163  0.0056  0.0454  0.0443  0.0841  0.06
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Clidat 1994   44  0.3354  0.0047  0.0541  0.0551  0.0552  0.05
Cohen 1997   57  0.2834  0.0059  0.0362  0.0335  0.0856  0.05
Coop 1987   27  0.3827  0.0031  0.0530  0.1255  0.0537  0.08
Cortot 1951   49  0.3242  0.0053  0.0453  0.0422  0.3933  0.12
Czerny 1949   31  0.3733  0.0018  0.1017  0.4138  0.0920  0.19
Czerny 1949b   37  0.3655  0.0020  0.1020  0.3824  0.2715  0.32
Ezaki 2006   21  0.4016  0.0124  0.0924  0.2836  0.1122  0.18
Falvay 1989   32  0.3638  0.0040  0.0834  0.0851  0.0542  0.06
Ferenczy 1958   33  0.3664  0.0038  0.0638  0.0642  0.0840  0.07
Fiorentino 1962   52  0.3059  0.0046  0.0544  0.0545  0.0847  0.06
Fliere 1977   46  0.3230  0.0048  0.0549  0.0544  0.0548  0.05
Fou 1978   20  0.4021  0.0019  0.1016  0.4230  0.3310  0.37
Francois 1956   59  0.2620  0.0062  0.0359  0.0363  0.0365  0.03
Hatto 1997   7  0.4453  0.009  0.1313  0.4521  0.436  0.44
Horowitz 1971   38  0.3532  0.0030  0.0631  0.1244  0.0538  0.08
Horowitz 1985   47  0.3243  0.0044  0.0640  0.0635  0.0939  0.07
Indjic 2001   12  0.4246  0.0014  0.1118  0.3820  0.458  0.41
Kapell 1951   58  0.2728  0.0057  0.0360  0.0359  0.0464  0.03
Kiepura 1999   22  0.3960  0.0028  0.1028  0.2143  0.0535  0.10
Kilenyi 1937   39  0.3461  0.0033  0.0546  0.0543  0.0745  0.06
Kissin 1993   14  0.4156  0.0022  0.1121  0.3426  0.3414  0.34
Kitain 1937   62  0.2162  0.0061  0.0358  0.0347  0.0563  0.04
Kushner 1990   2  0.493  0.032  0.242  0.6917  0.451  0.56
Levy 1951   54  0.2957  0.0054  0.0363  0.0350  0.0559  0.04
Luisada 1990   50  0.3135  0.0051  0.0455  0.0453  0.0561  0.04
Lushtak 2004   25  0.3826  0.0027  0.0926  0.2245  0.0732  0.12
Lympany 1968   56  0.2950  0.0058  0.0452  0.0462  0.0457  0.04
Magaloff 1977   29  0.3831  0.0042  0.0736  0.0730  0.2131  0.12
Magaloff 1977b   41  0.3422  0.0052  0.0457  0.0442  0.0562  0.04
Magin 1975   28  0.3836  0.0025  0.0827  0.2133  0.1423  0.17
Milkina 1970   4  0.4637  0.004  0.203  0.5729  0.259  0.38
Mohovich 1999   63  0.2024  0.0063  0.0547  0.0552  0.0554  0.05
Nadelmann 1956   40  0.3423  0.0039  0.0637  0.0650  0.0550  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   9  0.436  0.027  0.129  0.5214  0.385  0.44
Olejniczac 1990   60  0.2665  0.0055  0.0456  0.0455  0.0651  0.05
Olejniczak 1991   53  0.2941  0.0041  0.0735  0.0753  0.0643  0.06
Osinska 1989   5  0.4515  0.0110  0.134  0.5743  0.0719  0.20
Paderewski 1912   24  0.3819  0.008  0.1311  0.499  0.414  0.45
Perahia 1994   15  0.4110  0.0113  0.168  0.5225  0.2611  0.37
Perlemuter 1986   45  0.3313  0.0149  0.0548  0.0558  0.0460  0.04
Poblocka 1999   17  0.4039  0.0023  0.1223  0.3035  0.0824  0.15
Rangell 2001   36  0.3658  0.0043  0.0833  0.0831  0.1534  0.11
Risler 1920   35  0.3640  0.0036  0.0542  0.0519  0.2829  0.12
Rosen 1989   55  0.2929  0.0050  0.0543  0.0534  0.1536  0.09
Rubinstein 1939   8  0.4312  0.016  0.1215  0.4328  0.1817  0.28
Rubinstein 1952   11  0.4344  0.0017  0.1219  0.3845  0.0525  0.14
Rubinstein 1966   3  0.477  0.023  0.166  0.5331  0.2413  0.36
Rummel 1943   48  0.3251  0.0045  0.0550  0.0544  0.0553  0.05
Shebanova 2002   10  0.435  0.0211  0.155  0.5332  0.1916  0.32
Smith 1975   30  0.379  0.0135  0.0545  0.0545  0.0549  0.05
Szpilman 1948   61  0.2448  0.0060  0.0361  0.0349  0.0658  0.04
Uninsky 1971   18  0.4045  0.0012  0.1510  0.5221  0.393  0.45
Wasowski 1980   6  0.442  0.045  0.127  0.5315  0.412  0.47
Weissenberg 1971   42  0.334  0.0229  0.0729  0.1431  0.1326  0.13
Average   1  0.601  0.691  0.681  0.8544  0.0618  0.23
Random 1    64  0.0549  0.0064  0.0364  0.033  0.5030  0.12
Random 2   65  -0.0225  0.0065  0.0265  0.0228  0.2046  0.06
Random 3   66  -0.0266  0.0066  0.0166  0.0153  0.0366  0.02

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).