Horowitz 1985

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Afanassiev 2001   11  0.606  0.015  0.226  0.5749  0.0510  0.17
Ashkenazy 1981   45  0.4934  0.0042  0.0640  0.0663  0.0448  0.05
Beliavsky 2004   37  0.527  0.0125  0.1125  0.3455  0.0520  0.13
BenOr 1989   32  0.5348  0.0030  0.0729  0.2555  0.0628  0.12
Biret 1990   4  0.655  0.024  0.224  0.6856  0.059  0.18
Blet 2003   25  0.5423  0.0016  0.1620  0.3653  0.0426  0.12
Block 1995   59  0.4529  0.0055  0.0459  0.0450  0.0560  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   20  0.5624  0.0037  0.0837  0.0849  0.0736  0.07
Chiu 1999   60  0.448  0.0148  0.0450  0.0463  0.0363  0.03
Clidat 1994   21  0.5626  0.0023  0.0919  0.3758  0.0517  0.14
Cohen 1997   63  0.3459  0.0063  0.0543  0.0551  0.0549  0.05
Coop 1987   55  0.4656  0.0053  0.0460  0.0460  0.0455  0.04
Cortot 1951   53  0.4644  0.0061  0.0461  0.0446  0.0650  0.05
Czerny 1949   18  0.5721  0.0017  0.1410  0.5362  0.0414  0.15
Czerny 1949b   24  0.5538  0.0022  0.0915  0.4562  0.0419  0.13
Ezaki 2006   44  0.5046  0.0046  0.0548  0.0559  0.0543  0.05
Falvay 1989   61  0.4247  0.0062  0.0546  0.0557  0.0544  0.05
Ferenczy 1958   62  0.4236  0.0060  0.0455  0.0453  0.0558  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   30  0.5419  0.0038  0.0935  0.0951  0.0639  0.07
Fliere 1977   22  0.5639  0.0027  0.0927  0.3255  0.0615  0.14
Fou 1978   52  0.4754  0.0056  0.0547  0.0561  0.0545  0.05
Francois 1956   51  0.4762  0.0059  0.0363  0.0340  0.0662  0.04
Hatto 1997   49  0.4861  0.0052  0.0451  0.0462  0.0457  0.04
Horowitz 1971   1  0.751  0.761  0.751  0.902  0.811  0.85
Horowitz 1985   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Indjic 2001   50  0.4863  0.0057  0.0458  0.0463  0.0364  0.03
Kapell 1951   46  0.4942  0.0031  0.0831  0.1763  0.0337  0.07
Kiepura 1999   23  0.569  0.0139  0.1333  0.1354  0.0533  0.08
Kilenyi 1937   42  0.5025  0.0033  0.1034  0.1057  0.0538  0.07
Kissin 1993   27  0.5435  0.0019  0.1018  0.3961  0.0424  0.12
Kitain 1937   56  0.464  0.0212  0.1217  0.414  0.642  0.51
Kushner 1990   14  0.5866  0.0014  0.1113  0.4764  0.0323  0.12
Levy 1951   34  0.5322  0.0029  0.0930  0.2156  0.0530  0.10
Luisada 1990   15  0.5720  0.0026  0.1023  0.3535  0.0811  0.17
Lushtak 2004   29  0.5440  0.0024  0.1122  0.3564  0.0331  0.10
Lympany 1968   19  0.5731  0.0021  0.0821  0.3659  0.0421  0.12
Magaloff 1977   41  0.5057  0.0051  0.0449  0.0458  0.0559  0.04
Magaloff 1977b   40  0.5058  0.0050  0.0457  0.0463  0.0365  0.03
Magin 1975   48  0.4918  0.0043  0.0453  0.0462  0.0453  0.04
Milkina 1970   12  0.6037  0.008  0.139  0.5360  0.0413  0.15
Mohovich 1999   6  0.6210  0.019  0.148  0.5443  0.068  0.18
Nadelmann 1956   2  0.663  0.032  0.393  0.6950  0.057  0.19
Ohlsson 1999   58  0.4514  0.0058  0.0456  0.0451  0.0556  0.04
Olejniczac 1990   26  0.5417  0.0035  0.0739  0.0745  0.0641  0.06
Olejniczak 1991   35  0.5265  0.0041  0.0936  0.0949  0.0734  0.08
Osinska 1989   5  0.6332  0.006  0.255  0.6349  0.066  0.19
Paderewski 1912   33  0.5351  0.0034  0.0642  0.0657  0.0546  0.05
Perahia 1994   7  0.6211  0.017  0.147  0.5419  0.423  0.48
Perlemuter 1986   36  0.5243  0.0040  0.0738  0.0757  0.0540  0.06
Poblocka 1999   38  0.5128  0.0044  0.0544  0.0558  0.0451  0.04
Rangell 2001   57  0.4527  0.0054  0.0364  0.0361  0.0466  0.03
Risler 1920   47  0.4952  0.0045  0.0545  0.0562  0.0452  0.04
Rosen 1989   43  0.5030  0.0049  0.0454  0.0445  0.0747  0.05
Rubinstein 1939   8  0.6113  0.0011  0.1914  0.4627  0.204  0.30
Rubinstein 1952   13  0.5960  0.0015  0.1616  0.4434  0.0612  0.16
Rubinstein 1966   9  0.6155  0.0010  0.1212  0.4958  0.0416  0.14
Rummel 1943   31  0.5364  0.0036  0.0641  0.0639  0.0642  0.06
Shebanova 2002   39  0.5116  0.0032  0.0832  0.1562  0.0435  0.08
Smith 1975   10  0.6012  0.0013  0.1511  0.5062  0.0322  0.12
Szpilman 1948   17  0.5741  0.0028  0.1028  0.3259  0.0518  0.13
Uninsky 1971   28  0.5415  0.0018  0.1024  0.3459  0.0425  0.12
Wasowski 1980   16  0.5733  0.0020  0.1126  0.3358  0.0429  0.11
Weissenberg 1971   54  0.4649  0.0047  0.0452  0.0455  0.0554  0.04
Average   3  0.652  0.063  0.302  0.8059  0.055  0.20
Random 1    65  0.0053  0.0065  0.0265  0.028  0.4232  0.09
Random 2   64  0.0845  0.0064  0.0462  0.0418  0.3627  0.12
Random 3   66  -0.0350  0.0066  0.0166  0.0129  0.1761  0.04

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).