Katin 1996

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   20  0.7224  0.0024  0.1024  0.3532  0.1827  0.25
Ax 1995   4  0.7816  0.016  0.203  0.769  0.605  0.68
Bacha 1998   51  0.5856  0.0055  0.0654  0.0637  0.0655  0.06
Barbosa 1983   31  0.6734  0.0014  0.1717  0.497  0.5415  0.51
BenOr 1989   48  0.6036  0.0044  0.0941  0.0945  0.0748  0.08
Biret 1990   22  0.708  0.0215  0.1916  0.5113  0.6611  0.58
Brailowsky 1960   44  0.6219  0.0045  0.0651  0.0639  0.0850  0.07
Chiu 1999   43  0.6451  0.0043  0.0745  0.0722  0.4432  0.18
Clidat 1994   32  0.6744  0.0027  0.0726  0.2339  0.0838  0.14
Cohen 1997   61  0.5062  0.0060  0.0559  0.0524  0.2741  0.12
Cortot 1951   63  0.3263  0.0063  0.0555  0.0554  0.0465  0.04
Csalog 1996   28  0.6818  0.0030  0.0732  0.1418  0.3728  0.23
Czerny 1989   23  0.6954  0.0033  0.1037  0.1021  0.3433  0.18
Ezaki 2006   16  0.7342  0.0022  0.1022  0.3721  0.4018  0.38
Falvay 1989   17  0.7310  0.0216  0.1614  0.6232  0.1324  0.28
Fiorentino 1962   8  0.7517  0.0110  0.2011  0.659  0.618  0.63
Fliere 1977   30  0.6833  0.0037  0.0843  0.0846  0.0649  0.07
Fou 1978   10  0.746  0.057  0.1813  0.647  0.637  0.63
Francois 1956   41  0.6547  0.0039  0.0844  0.0816  0.4034  0.18
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.4352  0.0062  0.0650  0.0648  0.0560  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   58  0.5429  0.0046  0.0746  0.0725  0.2439  0.13
Groot 1988   24  0.6926  0.0029  0.0728  0.1914  0.3626  0.26
Hatto 1993   13  0.7312  0.0112  0.1810  0.6620  0.4114  0.52
Hatto 1997   12  0.7341  0.0013  0.2312  0.6521  0.4213  0.52
Horszowski 1983   60  0.5240  0.0061  0.0560  0.0550  0.0559  0.05
Indjic 2001   11  0.7315  0.0111  0.189  0.6620  0.4212  0.53
Katin 1996   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Kiepura 1999   37  0.6630  0.0032  0.0930  0.186  0.6121  0.33
Korecka 1992   59  0.5257  0.0059  0.0463  0.0452  0.0564  0.04
Kushner 1990   35  0.6611  0.0220  0.1120  0.394  0.6317  0.50
Lilamand 2001   56  0.5627  0.0056  0.0558  0.0532  0.1152  0.07
Luisada 1990   33  0.6625  0.0038  0.1040  0.1017  0.4631  0.21
Luisada 2008   39  0.6521  0.0041  0.1038  0.1016  0.5429  0.23
Lushtak 2004   36  0.6613  0.0126  0.0731  0.1535  0.1040  0.12
Malcuzynski 1951   26  0.6928  0.0031  0.0829  0.1947  0.0642  0.11
Malcuzynski 1961   40  0.6561  0.0034  0.1136  0.1147  0.0647  0.08
Magaloff 1977   50  0.5849  0.0048  0.0562  0.0529  0.2043  0.10
Magin 1975   46  0.6260  0.0051  0.1039  0.1058  0.0551  0.07
Meguri 1997   55  0.5664  0.0049  0.0561  0.0552  0.0563  0.05
Milkina 1970   3  0.795  0.062  0.237  0.718  0.664  0.68
Mohovich 1999   27  0.6845  0.0021  0.1119  0.4319  0.3420  0.38
Nezu 2005   21  0.7032  0.0018  0.1518  0.4630  0.2023  0.30
Ohlsson 1999   15  0.7337  0.0019  0.1221  0.3722  0.4019  0.38
Olejniczak 1990   34  0.6658  0.0035  0.1134  0.1138  0.0846  0.09
Osinska 1989   7  0.764  0.079  0.224  0.7317  0.519  0.61
Perlemuter 1992   52  0.5723  0.0054  0.0652  0.065  0.3936  0.15
Poblocka 1999   18  0.7259  0.0023  0.0923  0.3727  0.2722  0.32
Rangell 2001   45  0.6248  0.0050  0.0649  0.0641  0.0758  0.06
Richter 1960   57  0.5531  0.0057  0.0648  0.0646  0.0656  0.06
Richter 1961   54  0.5743  0.0053  0.0556  0.0544  0.0661  0.05
Rosen 1989   42  0.6535  0.0042  0.0942  0.0941  0.0653  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   5  0.772  0.184  0.216  0.726  0.692  0.70
Rubinstein 1952   6  0.777  0.035  0.265  0.726  0.683  0.70
Rubinstein 1966   1  0.801  0.291  0.281  0.764  0.731  0.74
Rudanovskaya 2007   53  0.5755  0.0058  0.0747  0.0737  0.0657  0.06
Shebanova 2002   25  0.6946  0.0036  0.1135  0.1130  0.1737  0.14
Smith 1975   38  0.6614  0.0140  0.1233  0.1220  0.3830  0.21
Sztompka 1959   47  0.6138  0.0047  0.0557  0.0548  0.0662  0.05
Tanyel 1992   29  0.6820  0.0028  0.0827  0.2233  0.1235  0.16
Tsujii 2005   2  0.803  0.123  0.252  0.7620  0.4910  0.61
Uninsky 1959   14  0.7322  0.0017  0.1615  0.5711  0.4416  0.50
Vardi 1988   9  0.759  0.028  0.198  0.675  0.636  0.65
Wasowski 1980   49  0.6050  0.0052  0.0653  0.0642  0.0654  0.06
Zimerman 1975   19  0.7239  0.0025  0.0925  0.2930  0.2425  0.26
Random 1   65  -0.0165  0.0064  0.0265  0.027  0.4744  0.10
Random 2   66  -0.0466  0.0066  0.0166  0.0157  0.0466  0.02
Random 3   64  0.0053  0.0065  0.0264  0.028  0.4145  0.09

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).