Shebanova 2002

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   3  0.754  0.036  0.203  0.715  0.564  0.63
Ax 1995   26  0.6941  0.0028  0.0728  0.1949  0.0735  0.12
Bacha 1998   45  0.6128  0.0047  0.0554  0.0526  0.2337  0.11
Barbosa 1983   47  0.6022  0.0020  0.0824  0.2421  0.4117  0.31
BenOr 1989   59  0.5163  0.0053  0.0649  0.0651  0.0656  0.06
Biret 1990   46  0.6112  0.0148  0.0559  0.0552  0.0663  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   38  0.6355  0.0045  0.0648  0.0637  0.0945  0.07
Chiu 1999   17  0.7125  0.0024  0.0918  0.352  0.6211  0.47
Clidat 1994   13  0.728  0.015  0.207  0.637  0.566  0.59
Cohen 1997   61  0.4929  0.0060  0.0462  0.0421  0.3039  0.11
Cortot 1951   63  0.3343  0.0063  0.0652  0.0645  0.0564  0.05
Csalog 1996   23  0.6911  0.0126  0.0825  0.2215  0.3819  0.29
Czerny 1989   11  0.7215  0.0025  0.0923  0.2622  0.3120  0.28
Ezaki 2006   18  0.7138  0.0032  0.1029  0.1932  0.1327  0.16
Falvay 1989   2  0.765  0.019  0.205  0.7027  0.2813  0.44
Fiorentino 1962   39  0.6318  0.0043  0.0651  0.0644  0.0848  0.07
Fliere 1977   4  0.746  0.0111  0.1612  0.5022  0.3714  0.43
Fou 1978   14  0.727  0.018  0.179  0.5812  0.588  0.58
Francois 1956   48  0.6058  0.0041  0.0556  0.0538  0.1050  0.07
Goldenweiser 1946   62  0.4724  0.0062  0.0560  0.0542  0.0560  0.05
Gornostaeva 1994   56  0.5453  0.0042  0.0558  0.0520  0.3533  0.13
Groot 1988   40  0.6235  0.0050  0.0740  0.0758  0.0557  0.06
Hatto 1993   9  0.739  0.013  0.194  0.7016  0.497  0.59
Hatto 1997   5  0.7417  0.002  0.222  0.7115  0.535  0.61
Horszowski 1983   43  0.6133  0.0051  0.0646  0.061  0.5926  0.19
Indjic 2001   7  0.7326  0.004  0.166  0.6916  0.489  0.58
Katin 1996   25  0.6930  0.0030  0.0730  0.1735  0.1131  0.14
Kiepura 1999   58  0.5157  0.0058  0.0743  0.0758  0.0459  0.05
Korecka 1992   60  0.5064  0.0061  0.0650  0.0654  0.0561  0.05
Kushner 1990   49  0.5847  0.0037  0.0936  0.0930  0.2430  0.15
Lilamand 2001   57  0.5339  0.0056  0.0561  0.0529  0.1740  0.09
Luisada 1990   55  0.5536  0.0054  0.0644  0.0639  0.0846  0.07
Luisada 2008   53  0.5556  0.0052  0.0555  0.0538  0.0854  0.06
Lushtak 2004   34  0.6531  0.0033  0.1134  0.1139  0.0841  0.09
Malcuzynski 1951   30  0.6644  0.0034  0.1133  0.1142  0.0744  0.09
Malcuzynski 1961   33  0.6542  0.0012  0.1214  0.4449  0.0529  0.15
Magaloff 1977   50  0.5840  0.0049  0.0653  0.0626  0.2434  0.12
Magin 1975   41  0.6251  0.0046  0.0738  0.0759  0.0552  0.06
Meguri 1997   44  0.6123  0.0018  0.1026  0.2116  0.3323  0.26
Milkina 1970   19  0.7152  0.0016  0.1415  0.4341  0.0925  0.20
Mohovich 1999   31  0.6662  0.0029  0.0632  0.1447  0.0643  0.09
Nezu 2005   35  0.6537  0.0015  0.1117  0.3931  0.2021  0.28
Ohlsson 1999   10  0.7310  0.0114  0.1211  0.5118  0.4312  0.47
Olejniczak 1990   42  0.6234  0.0039  0.0742  0.0749  0.0658  0.06
Osinska 1989   21  0.7016  0.0023  0.1119  0.3550  0.0728  0.16
Perlemuter 1992   52  0.5648  0.0059  0.0463  0.0448  0.0565  0.04
Poblocka 1999   24  0.6959  0.0027  0.0722  0.2639  0.0732  0.13
Rangell 2001   6  0.7413  0.0110  0.238  0.596  0.702  0.64
Richter 1960   22  0.7019  0.0021  0.0820  0.343  0.6810  0.48
Richter 1961   8  0.732  0.047  0.1610  0.543  0.733  0.63
Rosen 1989   36  0.6454  0.0044  0.0645  0.0646  0.0655  0.06
Rubinstein 1939   20  0.7050  0.0031  0.0731  0.1637  0.0836  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   29  0.6645  0.0035  0.0837  0.0843  0.0649  0.07
Rubinstein 1966   28  0.6661  0.0040  0.0741  0.0756  0.0553  0.06
Rudanovskaya 2007   27  0.673  0.0322  0.1027  0.2015  0.4718  0.31
Shebanova 2002   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Smith 1975   51  0.5746  0.0055  0.0647  0.0647  0.0651  0.06
Sztompka 1959   54  0.5549  0.0057  0.0557  0.0554  0.0562  0.05
Tanyel 1992   32  0.6620  0.0038  0.0739  0.0742  0.0747  0.07
Tsujii 2005   1  0.841  0.751  0.731  0.872  0.721  0.79
Uninsky 1959   15  0.7221  0.0019  0.0821  0.3224  0.2122  0.26
Vardi 1988   16  0.7227  0.0013  0.1116  0.4322  0.3416  0.38
Wasowski 1980   37  0.6432  0.0036  0.1035  0.1010  0.6024  0.24
Zimerman 1975   12  0.7214  0.0017  0.1313  0.4624  0.3915  0.42
Random 1   65  -0.0466  0.0065  0.0265  0.0213  0.4042  0.09
Random 2   64  0.0060  0.0064  0.0364  0.039  0.4138  0.11
Random 3   66  -0.0665  0.0066  0.0166  0.0150  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).