Brailowsky 1960

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   45  0.5445  0.0039  0.0843  0.0820  0.4039  0.18
Ax 1995   5  0.7012  0.016  0.172  0.7211  0.644  0.68
Bacha 1998   51  0.4932  0.0049  0.0937  0.0920  0.3240  0.17
Barbosa 1983   40  0.5623  0.0045  0.0657  0.0626  0.1948  0.11
BenOr 1989   22  0.6253  0.0025  0.1124  0.2826  0.2929  0.28
Biret 1990   13  0.6710  0.0114  0.2313  0.553  0.708  0.62
Brailowsky 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Chiu 1999   52  0.4847  0.0051  0.0841  0.089  0.5633  0.21
Clidat 1994   46  0.5334  0.0040  0.0656  0.0616  0.4242  0.16
Cohen 1997   62  0.3150  0.0063  0.0658  0.0654  0.0561  0.05
Cortot 1951   59  0.4062  0.0059  0.0462  0.0425  0.3049  0.11
Csalog 1996   34  0.5939  0.0032  0.0832  0.169  0.6026  0.31
Czerny 1989   15  0.6628  0.0017  0.1416  0.507  0.6610  0.57
Ezaki 2006   27  0.6140  0.0030  0.0830  0.2021  0.4427  0.30
Falvay 1989   1  0.751  0.401  0.391  0.826  0.612  0.71
Fiorentino 1962   8  0.6825  0.008  0.1511  0.5713  0.5812  0.57
Fliere 1977   29  0.6027  0.0024  0.1121  0.3511  0.4422  0.39
Fou 1978   38  0.5638  0.0033  0.1035  0.1033  0.0951  0.09
Francois 1956   24  0.6224  0.0016  0.1117  0.471  0.6714  0.56
Goldenweiser 1946   49  0.5218  0.0037  0.0654  0.065  0.6137  0.19
Gornostaeva 1994   47  0.5357  0.0048  0.0844  0.086  0.5435  0.21
Groot 1988   3  0.722  0.192  0.243  0.722  0.721  0.72
Hatto 1993   37  0.5764  0.0043  0.0840  0.0845  0.0758  0.07
Hatto 1997   44  0.5563  0.0047  0.0847  0.0838  0.0855  0.08
Horszowski 1983   58  0.4154  0.0058  0.0845  0.0810  0.4536  0.19
Indjic 2001   36  0.5742  0.0044  0.1133  0.1141  0.0752  0.09
Katin 1996   43  0.5517  0.0038  0.0751  0.0742  0.0954  0.08
Kiepura 1999   31  0.5926  0.0036  0.1134  0.1127  0.3038  0.18
Korecka 1992   26  0.6146  0.0026  0.0827  0.246  0.6721  0.40
Kushner 1990   16  0.6511  0.0115  0.1319  0.3913  0.5118  0.45
Lilamand 2001   63  0.3060  0.0062  0.0463  0.0440  0.0659  0.05
Luisada 1990   48  0.5330  0.0050  0.1036  0.1039  0.1150  0.10
Luisada 2008   54  0.4758  0.0053  0.0750  0.0748  0.0756  0.07
Lushtak 2004   21  0.6319  0.0023  0.0920  0.3620  0.3824  0.37
Malcuzynski 1951   10  0.677  0.0212  0.2014  0.5518  0.4617  0.50
Malcuzynski 1961   6  0.698  0.029  0.189  0.5815  0.4915  0.53
Magaloff 1977   33  0.5943  0.0041  0.0749  0.072  0.7732  0.23
Magin 1975   7  0.686  0.0210  0.1510  0.587  0.599  0.58
Meguri 1997   53  0.4851  0.0052  0.0846  0.0830  0.2544  0.14
Milkina 1970   14  0.6713  0.017  0.147  0.629  0.5211  0.57
Mohovich 1999   42  0.5522  0.0035  0.0939  0.0928  0.2443  0.15
Nezu 2005   39  0.5655  0.0046  0.0653  0.0647  0.0857  0.07
Ohlsson 1999   28  0.6031  0.0029  0.1029  0.2229  0.2134  0.21
Olejniczak 1990   9  0.6829  0.0013  0.1712  0.5613  0.5613  0.56
Osinska 1989   19  0.6421  0.0022  0.1223  0.3129  0.2728  0.29
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.3761  0.0060  0.0561  0.0552  0.0463  0.04
Poblocka 1999   32  0.5935  0.0042  0.0938  0.0934  0.1347  0.11
Rangell 2001   60  0.3948  0.0061  0.0659  0.0645  0.0562  0.05
Richter 1960   50  0.4937  0.0054  0.0652  0.0621  0.3345  0.14
Richter 1961   57  0.4256  0.0056  0.0560  0.0523  0.3146  0.12
Rosen 1989   30  0.5933  0.0031  0.0931  0.1726  0.3331  0.24
Rubinstein 1939   35  0.5814  0.0119  0.1126  0.2521  0.4825  0.35
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.674  0.085  0.216  0.664  0.696  0.67
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.649  0.0218  0.1315  0.5114  0.5016  0.50
Rudanovskaya 2007   55  0.4452  0.0055  0.0748  0.0716  0.4141  0.17
Shebanova 2002   56  0.4449  0.0057  0.0655  0.0659  0.0460  0.05
Smith 1975   11  0.6716  0.0011  0.178  0.607  0.667  0.63
Sztompka 1959   20  0.6341  0.0027  0.0828  0.238  0.6123  0.37
Tanyel 1992   2  0.725  0.033  0.214  0.705  0.673  0.68
Tsujii 2005   18  0.6415  0.0121  0.0922  0.3531  0.1930  0.26
Uninsky 1959   4  0.723  0.094  0.215  0.694  0.665  0.67
Vardi 1988   41  0.5536  0.0034  0.0842  0.0845  0.0853  0.08
Wasowski 1980   25  0.6220  0.0028  0.0925  0.263  0.7519  0.44
Zimerman 1975   23  0.6244  0.0020  0.1218  0.4421  0.3820  0.41
Random 1   66  -0.0365  0.0066  0.0166  0.0149  0.0466  0.02
Random 2   64  -0.0159  0.0065  0.0265  0.0244  0.0564  0.03
Random 3   65  -0.0166  0.0064  0.0364  0.0346  0.0465  0.03

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).