Random 3

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   32  -0.1323  0.0019  0.0921  0.2867  0.0125  0.05
Ax 1995   48  -0.1650  0.0044  0.0543  0.0567  0.0156  0.02
Bacha 1998   67  -0.2746  0.0066  0.0266  0.0267  0.0164  0.01
Barbosa 1983   52  -0.1627  0.0030  0.0826  0.2165  0.0217  0.06
BenOr 1989   39  -0.1432  0.0040  0.0639  0.0667  0.0157  0.02
Biret 1990   49  -0.1655  0.0043  0.0544  0.0567  0.0158  0.02
Brailowsky 1960   6  -0.0451  0.008  0.1511  0.4365  0.028  0.09
Chiu 1999   53  -0.1729  0.0039  0.0736  0.0767  0.0133  0.03
Clidat 1994   21  -0.1019  0.0116  0.0719  0.3167  0.0120  0.06
Cohen 1997   26  -0.1217  0.019  0.1210  0.4367  0.0113  0.07
Cortot 1951   62  -0.2110  0.0238  0.0637  0.0667  0.0160  0.02
Csalog 1996   11  -0.0836  0.0017  0.0814  0.3567  0.0118  0.06
Czerny 1989   18  -0.1026  0.0028  0.0624  0.2267  0.0123  0.05
Ezaki 2006   35  -0.1452  0.0047  0.0445  0.0467  0.0137  0.02
Falvay 1989   45  -0.1667  0.0041  0.0542  0.0567  0.0141  0.02
Fiorentino 1962   31  -0.1343  0.0023  0.0822  0.2767  0.0126  0.05
Fliere 1977   29  -0.1366  0.0024  0.0625  0.2267  0.0121  0.05
Fou 1978   64  -0.2463  0.0064  0.0264  0.0267  0.0163  0.01
Francois 1956   19  -0.1020  0.0111  0.106  0.4767  0.0114  0.07
Goldenweiser 1946   10  -0.0714  0.0114  0.1127  0.2067  0.0128  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   59  -0.209  0.0233  0.0633  0.1267  0.0136  0.03
Groot 1988   3  -0.013  0.046  0.198  0.4765  0.026  0.10
Hatto 1993   57  -0.1740  0.0059  0.0354  0.0367  0.0159  0.02
Hatto 1997   55  -0.1745  0.0060  0.0361  0.0367  0.0149  0.02
Horszowski 1983   7  -0.0413  0.0213  0.1015  0.3565  0.029  0.08
Indjic 2001   56  -0.1762  0.0061  0.0452  0.0467  0.0155  0.02
Katin 1996   22  -0.1028  0.0032  0.0732  0.1467  0.0130  0.04
Kiepura 1999   51  -0.1633  0.0031  0.0631  0.1567  0.0127  0.04
Korecka 1992   15  -0.0918  0.0125  0.0629  0.1767  0.0129  0.04
Kushner 1990   9  -0.067  0.035  0.165  0.5065  0.033  0.12
Lilamand 2001   46  -0.1625  0.0056  0.0355  0.0367  0.0147  0.02
Luisada 1990   17  -0.1030  0.0036  0.0734  0.0767  0.0135  0.03
Luisada 2008   36  -0.1439  0.0051  0.0448  0.0467  0.0150  0.02
Lushtak 2004   30  -0.1311  0.0222  0.0723  0.2267  0.0124  0.05
Malcuzynski 1951   66  -0.2460  0.0065  0.0265  0.0267  0.0167  0.01
Malcuzynski 1961   65  -0.2461  0.0063  0.0263  0.0267  0.0165  0.01
Magaloff 1977   28  -0.135  0.0334  0.0638  0.0667  0.0152  0.02
Magin 1975   63  -0.2258  0.0067  0.0167  0.0167  0.0162  0.01
Meguri 1997   58  -0.1938  0.0048  0.0449  0.0467  0.0146  0.02
Milkina 1970   8  -0.0534  0.0015  0.0713  0.3767  0.0116  0.06
Mohovich 1999   13  -0.0859  0.0027  0.0530  0.1667  0.0131  0.04
Nezu 2005   61  -0.2116  0.0150  0.0450  0.0467  0.0154  0.02
Ohlsson 1999   47  -0.1656  0.0057  0.0357  0.0367  0.0145  0.02
Olejniczak 1990   40  -0.1441  0.0055  0.0453  0.0467  0.0161  0.02
Osinska 1989   37  -0.1437  0.0035  0.0640  0.0667  0.0139  0.02
Perlemuter 1992   27  -0.1244  0.0058  0.0358  0.0367  0.0138  0.02
Poblocka 1999   50  -0.1654  0.0049  0.0451  0.0467  0.0140  0.02
Rangell 2001   60  -0.2049  0.0062  0.0262  0.0267  0.0166  0.01
Richter 1960   24  -0.106  0.0310  0.139  0.4467  0.0111  0.07
Richter 1961   25  -0.1153  0.0018  0.0716  0.3367  0.0115  0.06
Rosen 1989   2  0.002  0.052  0.252  0.5566  0.025  0.10
Rubinstein 1939   14  -0.0948  0.0026  0.0620  0.2967  0.0122  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   42  -0.1515  0.0129  0.0728  0.1967  0.0132  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   23  -0.1021  0.0120  0.1117  0.3267  0.0119  0.06
Rudanovskaya 2007   4  -0.0212  0.023  0.194  0.5267  0.0112  0.07
Shebanova 2002   38  -0.1447  0.0046  0.0447  0.0467  0.0151  0.02
Smith 1975   43  -0.1531  0.0045  0.0446  0.0467  0.0142  0.02
Sztompka 1959   33  -0.1335  0.0053  0.0359  0.0367  0.0144  0.02
Tanyel 1992   12  -0.088  0.037  0.117  0.4766  0.024  0.10
Tsujii 2005   34  -0.1364  0.0042  0.0541  0.0567  0.0153  0.02
Uninsky 1959   41  -0.1457  0.0054  0.0360  0.0367  0.0143  0.02
Vardi 1988   44  -0.1542  0.0037  0.0735  0.0767  0.0134  0.03
Wasowski 1980   20  -0.1022  0.0112  0.1112  0.4166  0.027  0.09
Zimerman 1975   16  -0.0924  0.0021  0.0918  0.3166  0.0210  0.08
Average   54  -0.1765  0.0052  0.0356  0.0367  0.0148  0.02
Random 1   1  0.041  0.521  0.521  0.732  0.601  0.66
Random 2   5  -0.034  0.044  0.153  0.5421  0.252  0.37
Random 3   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target

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).