Chiu 1999

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   47  0.6210  0.0139  0.0647  0.0639  0.0751  0.06
Ashkenazy 1981   26  0.7127  0.0023  0.0923  0.4021  0.2427  0.31
Beliavsky 2004   37  0.6514  0.0138  0.0837  0.0811  0.4633  0.19
BenOr 1989   20  0.7421  0.0022  0.1221  0.4322  0.3025  0.36
Biret 1990   49  0.6141  0.0048  0.0550  0.0537  0.0753  0.06
Blet 2003   34  0.6738  0.0040  0.0643  0.0627  0.1343  0.09
Block 1995   14  0.7711  0.0117  0.1419  0.449  0.5516  0.49
Brailowsky 1960   58  0.4822  0.0061  0.0362  0.0342  0.0854  0.05
Chiu 1999   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Clidat 1994   27  0.7051  0.0029  0.1028  0.3021  0.2630  0.28
Cohen 1997   61  0.4435  0.0062  0.0460  0.0448  0.0563  0.04
Coop 1987   1  0.852  0.143  0.334  0.6012  0.535  0.56
Cortot 1951   55  0.5843  0.0058  0.0645  0.069  0.5635  0.18
Czerny 1949   35  0.6717  0.0111  0.1624  0.3921  0.3921  0.39
Czerny 1949b   28  0.7030  0.0014  0.1122  0.4216  0.4520  0.43
Ezaki 2006   2  0.854  0.032  0.203  0.6013  0.611  0.60
Falvay 1989   5  0.8337  0.006  0.346  0.5612  0.557  0.55
Ferenczy 1958   48  0.6262  0.0049  0.0551  0.0526  0.3041  0.12
Fiorentino 1962   24  0.7250  0.0030  0.1229  0.2624  0.3728  0.31
Fliere 1977   19  0.7416  0.0115  0.1112  0.5124  0.4218  0.46
Fou 1978   15  0.7728  0.0018  0.1616  0.4819  0.4917  0.48
Francois 1956   56  0.5749  0.0056  0.0456  0.0462  0.0365  0.03
Hatto 1997   41  0.6357  0.0034  0.0835  0.0815  0.4334  0.19
Horowitz 1971   51  0.5933  0.0051  0.0740  0.0746  0.0652  0.06
Horowitz 1985   60  0.4429  0.0060  0.0363  0.0350  0.0464  0.03
Indjic 2001   45  0.6356  0.0035  0.0739  0.0715  0.4136  0.17
Kapell 1951   12  0.7840  0.0016  0.1020  0.4416  0.4619  0.45
Kiepura 1999   31  0.6960  0.0032  0.1032  0.2020  0.4329  0.29
Kilenyi 1937   11  0.7939  0.008  0.1811  0.5318  0.5413  0.53
Kissin 1993   3  0.845  0.035  0.282  0.639  0.543  0.58
Kitain 1937   63  0.3059  0.0063  0.0549  0.0551  0.0556  0.05
Kushner 1990   32  0.6818  0.0033  0.1333  0.1326  0.1737  0.15
Levy 1951   50  0.5953  0.0053  0.0646  0.0636  0.0748  0.06
Luisada 1990   30  0.6923  0.0036  0.0741  0.0726  0.2640  0.13
Lushtak 2004   21  0.7319  0.0028  0.1027  0.3616  0.4222  0.39
Lympany 1968   46  0.6358  0.0050  0.0934  0.0942  0.0744  0.08
Magaloff 1977   16  0.7546  0.0020  0.0915  0.495  0.5814  0.53
Magaloff 1977b   18  0.7420  0.0021  0.1017  0.465  0.5615  0.51
Magin 1975   7  0.8126  0.007  0.277  0.5417  0.5312  0.53
Milkina 1970   38  0.6554  0.0044  0.0554  0.0542  0.0655  0.05
Mohovich 1999   54  0.5825  0.0043  0.0458  0.0459  0.0462  0.04
Nadelmann 1956   53  0.5844  0.0052  0.0555  0.0557  0.0459  0.04
Ohlsson 1999   10  0.796  0.0213  0.2210  0.549  0.568  0.55
Olejniczac 1990   25  0.7163  0.0031  0.1031  0.2327  0.3231  0.27
Olejniczak 1991   22  0.7348  0.0025  0.1025  0.3820  0.3524  0.36
Osinska 1989   23  0.7342  0.0027  0.1318  0.4434  0.1032  0.21
Paderewski 1912   36  0.6613  0.0124  0.0830  0.2513  0.3826  0.31
Perahia 1994   62  0.4031  0.0059  0.0461  0.0460  0.0461  0.04
Perlemuter 1986   44  0.6324  0.0037  0.0836  0.0846  0.0646  0.07
Poblocka 1999   9  0.7936  0.009  0.179  0.5415  0.576  0.55
Rangell 2001   8  0.8055  0.0012  0.1613  0.507  0.5910  0.54
Risler 1920   17  0.758  0.0219  0.1314  0.507  0.5711  0.53
Rosen 1989   33  0.6745  0.0047  0.0548  0.0524  0.3739  0.14
Rubinstein 1939   59  0.4812  0.0155  0.0459  0.0453  0.0558  0.04
Rubinstein 1952   40  0.6464  0.0046  0.0553  0.0547  0.0557  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   52  0.5815  0.0154  0.0742  0.0737  0.0650  0.06
Rummel 1943   57  0.4947  0.0057  0.0457  0.0451  0.0460  0.04
Shebanova 2002   13  0.787  0.0210  0.218  0.5412  0.549  0.54
Smith 1975   39  0.6552  0.0042  0.0738  0.0749  0.0549  0.06
Szpilman 1948   43  0.6365  0.0041  0.0644  0.0640  0.0747  0.06
Uninsky 1971   29  0.6934  0.0026  0.1026  0.3616  0.3923  0.37
Wasowski 1980   42  0.639  0.0245  0.0552  0.0518  0.3738  0.14
Weissenberg 1971   6  0.823  0.114  0.205  0.568  0.584  0.57
Average   4  0.841  0.461  0.461  0.8218  0.442  0.60
Random 1    65  -0.0166  0.0065  0.0265  0.0212  0.3445  0.08
Random 2   64  0.0332  0.0064  0.0364  0.0314  0.4042  0.11
Random 3   66  -0.0661  0.0066  0.0166  0.0137  0.0566  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).