Lushtak 2004

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   36  0.3846  0.0029  0.0728  0.1710  0.5320  0.30
Ashkenazy 1981   37  0.3861  0.0034  0.0743  0.0722  0.2834  0.14
Beliavsky 2004   7  0.522  0.096  0.258  0.622  0.794  0.70
BenOr 1989   31  0.3927  0.0039  0.0935  0.0953  0.0645  0.07
Biret 1990   15  0.4555  0.0018  0.1019  0.3217  0.3318  0.32
Blet 2003   51  0.3019  0.0040  0.0744  0.0742  0.0651  0.06
Block 1995   21  0.4330  0.0030  0.0631  0.1421  0.3227  0.21
Brailowsky 1960   49  0.3251  0.0053  0.0552  0.0546  0.0846  0.06
Chiu 1999   35  0.3835  0.0042  0.0745  0.0726  0.2235  0.12
Clidat 1994   4  0.573  0.084  0.274  0.773  0.792  0.78
Cohen 1997   59  0.2543  0.0059  0.0454  0.0436  0.0852  0.06
Coop 1987   6  0.5313  0.009  0.195  0.6711  0.5410  0.60
Cortot 1951   20  0.448  0.0221  0.0826  0.206  0.7017  0.37
Czerny 1949   18  0.4438  0.0024  0.0821  0.2822  0.2923  0.28
Czerny 1949b   24  0.4245  0.0036  0.0837  0.0822  0.3032  0.15
Ezaki 2006   32  0.397  0.0216  0.1123  0.2238  0.1031  0.15
Falvay 1989   19  0.4439  0.0022  0.0717  0.3422  0.4216  0.38
Ferenczy 1958   42  0.3741  0.0047  0.0741  0.0743  0.0844  0.07
Fiorentino 1962   56  0.2858  0.0055  0.0459  0.0460  0.0561  0.04
Fliere 1977   33  0.3837  0.0035  0.0840  0.0835  0.0742  0.07
Fou 1978   55  0.2842  0.0060  0.0551  0.0558  0.0456  0.04
Francois 1956   52  0.2962  0.0058  0.0457  0.0444  0.0562  0.04
Hatto 1997   10  0.5015  0.007  0.2411  0.594  0.688  0.63
Horowitz 1971   22  0.4250  0.0017  0.1016  0.3614  0.4715  0.41
Horowitz 1985   38  0.3825  0.0033  0.0838  0.0815  0.3929  0.18
Indjic 2001   12  0.4934  0.0010  0.2412  0.559  0.6211  0.58
Kapell 1951   41  0.3747  0.0041  0.0742  0.0744  0.0649  0.06
Kiepura 1999   11  0.5011  0.0111  0.299  0.624  0.676  0.64
Kilenyi 1937   60  0.2252  0.0061  0.0455  0.0459  0.0557  0.04
Kissin 1993   3  0.605  0.052  0.282  0.832  0.811  0.82
Kitain 1937   40  0.3828  0.0032  0.0732  0.136  0.6421  0.29
Kushner 1990   34  0.3844  0.0043  0.0839  0.0846  0.0550  0.06
Levy 1951   44  0.3620  0.0045  0.0649  0.0631  0.2036  0.11
Luisada 1990   50  0.3121  0.0052  0.0550  0.0531  0.1341  0.08
Lushtak 2004   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Lympany 1968   9  0.5112  0.0112  0.2010  0.603  0.687  0.64
Magaloff 1977   53  0.2931  0.0054  0.0461  0.0441  0.0558  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   48  0.3240  0.0049  0.0648  0.0630  0.1739  0.10
Magin 1975   23  0.4217  0.0025  0.0820  0.3031  0.2722  0.28
Milkina 1970   5  0.5510  0.015  0.297  0.6513  0.569  0.60
Mohovich 1999   29  0.4016  0.0031  0.0729  0.1722  0.3925  0.26
Nadelmann 1956   16  0.4433  0.0015  0.2313  0.5343  0.0630  0.18
Ohlsson 1999   45  0.3536  0.0038  0.0934  0.0943  0.0543  0.07
Olejniczac 1990   58  0.2766  0.0057  0.0456  0.0459  0.0559  0.04
Olejniczak 1991   57  0.2859  0.0051  0.0458  0.0440  0.0848  0.06
Osinska 1989   17  0.4426  0.0023  0.0727  0.1959  0.0440  0.09
Paderewski 1912   46  0.3454  0.0044  0.0647  0.0630  0.1838  0.10
Perahia 1994   2  0.614  0.073  0.403  0.802  0.773  0.78
Perlemuter 1986   14  0.4622  0.0014  0.1714  0.5112  0.4912  0.50
Poblocka 1999   47  0.3418  0.0048  0.0746  0.0740  0.0647  0.06
Rangell 2001   30  0.4014  0.0028  0.0830  0.1619  0.4724  0.27
Risler 1920   61  0.2157  0.0056  0.0363  0.0364  0.0363  0.03
Rosen 1989   62  0.1863  0.0062  0.0462  0.0450  0.0654  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   25  0.4249  0.0019  0.1018  0.3417  0.2819  0.31
Rubinstein 1952   43  0.3629  0.0046  0.0936  0.0959  0.0355  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   28  0.4148  0.0026  0.0722  0.2547  0.0537  0.11
Rummel 1943   54  0.2953  0.0050  0.0460  0.0443  0.0560  0.04
Shebanova 2002   13  0.4924  0.0013  0.1715  0.4521  0.4314  0.44
Smith 1975   39  0.3832  0.0027  0.1025  0.2023  0.2426  0.22
Szpilman 1948   63  0.1764  0.0063  0.0553  0.0560  0.0553  0.05
Uninsky 1971   8  0.516  0.028  0.196  0.673  0.695  0.68
Wasowski 1980   26  0.419  0.0120  0.0924  0.2030  0.1728  0.18
Weissenberg 1971   27  0.4123  0.0037  0.1033  0.1027  0.2033  0.14
Average   1  0.651  0.561  0.551  0.8924  0.2513  0.47
Random 1    65  -0.0465  0.0064  0.0264  0.0256  0.0365  0.02
Random 2   66  -0.0456  0.0065  0.0265  0.0236  0.0664  0.03
Random 3   64  -0.0460  0.0066  0.0166  0.0148  0.0466  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).