Cohen 1997

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   24  0.3724  0.0122  0.0722  0.3063  0.0327  0.09
Ax 1995   55  0.2665  0.0058  0.0552  0.0559  0.0552  0.05
Bacha 1998   54  0.2647  0.0060  0.0641  0.0660  0.0548  0.05
Barbosa 1983   6  0.421  0.161  0.163  0.6257  0.054  0.18
BenOr 1989   20  0.3742  0.0019  0.0821  0.3056  0.0522  0.12
Biret 1990   36  0.3326  0.0031  0.0533  0.1058  0.0535  0.07
Brailowsky 1960   42  0.3164  0.0048  0.0555  0.0559  0.0643  0.05
Chiu 1999   47  0.2946  0.0050  0.0550  0.0555  0.0457  0.04
Clidat 1994   60  0.2359  0.0055  0.0458  0.0448  0.0561  0.04
Cohen 1997   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cortot 1951   61  0.2235  0.0063  0.0554  0.0560  0.0363  0.04
Csalog 1996   13  0.4012  0.0213  0.1013  0.4662  0.0413  0.14
Czerny 1989   18  0.389  0.0317  0.0918  0.3158  0.0516  0.12
Ezaki 2006   34  0.3448  0.0032  0.0532  0.1058  0.0531  0.07
Falvay 1989   7  0.4232  0.008  0.125  0.5963  0.0410  0.15
Fiorentino 1962   63  0.2057  0.0062  0.0463  0.0455  0.0562  0.04
Fliere 1977   25  0.3729  0.0030  0.0628  0.1553  0.0626  0.09
Fou 1978   37  0.3251  0.0047  0.0456  0.0454  0.0558  0.04
Francois 1956   29  0.3538  0.0027  0.0727  0.1862  0.0430  0.08
Goldenweiser 1946   56  0.2537  0.0046  0.0460  0.0464  0.0456  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   43  0.3062  0.0043  0.0836  0.0857  0.0440  0.06
Groot 1988   57  0.2563  0.0059  0.0553  0.0556  0.0553  0.05
Hatto 1993   44  0.3060  0.0041  0.0835  0.0861  0.0441  0.06
Hatto 1997   35  0.3467  0.0036  0.0737  0.0762  0.0538  0.06
Horszowski 1983   53  0.2619  0.0153  0.0461  0.0463  0.0365  0.03
Indjic 2001   39  0.3261  0.0042  0.0934  0.0961  0.0534  0.07
Katin 1996   21  0.3733  0.0024  0.0825  0.2464  0.0328  0.08
Kiepura 1999   49  0.2849  0.0056  0.0551  0.0553  0.0542  0.05
Korecka 1992   48  0.2920  0.0151  0.0549  0.0564  0.0359  0.04
Kushner 1990   23  0.3755  0.0021  0.0819  0.3154  0.0519  0.12
Lilamand 2001   62  0.2111  0.0254  0.0462  0.0457  0.0460  0.04
Luisada 1990   38  0.3225  0.0133  0.0631  0.1163  0.0432  0.07
Luisada 2008   50  0.2743  0.0045  0.0643  0.0655  0.0639  0.06
Lushtak 2004   15  0.3914  0.017  0.137  0.5556  0.056  0.17
Malcuzynski 1951   46  0.3056  0.0049  0.0642  0.0659  0.0554  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   30  0.3536  0.0038  0.0645  0.0660  0.0549  0.05
Magaloff 1977   64  0.1050  0.0064  0.0364  0.0363  0.0466  0.03
Magin 1975   27  0.3658  0.0035  0.0644  0.0663  0.0447  0.05
Meguri 1997   2  0.445  0.084  0.1812  0.4837  0.065  0.17
Milkina 1970   11  0.4031  0.0018  0.1017  0.3964  0.0417  0.12
Mohovich 1999   9  0.4144  0.009  0.168  0.5461  0.0411  0.15
Nezu 2005   22  0.3710  0.0215  0.1214  0.4463  0.0415  0.13
Ohlsson 1999   28  0.3639  0.0029  0.0730  0.1456  0.0529  0.08
Olejniczak 1990   59  0.2366  0.0057  0.0459  0.0462  0.0564  0.04
Osinska 1989   10  0.4115  0.0112  0.096  0.5659  0.049  0.15
Perlemuter 1992   40  0.3113  0.0226  0.0826  0.2048  0.0524  0.10
Poblocka 1999   31  0.3527  0.0034  0.0647  0.0662  0.0444  0.05
Rangell 2001   8  0.4116  0.0111  0.1015  0.4443  0.068  0.16
Richter 1960   26  0.377  0.0314  0.1116  0.4360  0.0414  0.13
Richter 1961   41  0.3134  0.0040  0.0640  0.0645  0.0636  0.06
Rosen 1989   14  0.393  0.123  0.1710  0.5360  0.057  0.16
Rubinstein 1939   45  0.3028  0.0044  0.0646  0.0654  0.0546  0.05
Rubinstein 1952   16  0.3922  0.0120  0.0820  0.3053  0.0523  0.12
Rubinstein 1966   17  0.3918  0.0125  0.1024  0.2760  0.0520  0.12
Rudanovskaya 2007   51  0.2717  0.0128  0.0729  0.1457  0.0433  0.07
Shebanova 2002   19  0.3823  0.0123  0.0723  0.2942  0.0521  0.12
Smith 1975   58  0.2330  0.0061  0.0548  0.0558  0.0545  0.05
Sztompka 1959   32  0.3421  0.0139  0.0738  0.0755  0.0637  0.06
Tanyel 1992   4  0.434  0.102  0.154  0.6154  0.062  0.19
Tsujii 2005   33  0.3453  0.0037  0.0639  0.0659  0.0550  0.05
Uninsky 1959   1  0.472  0.145  0.181  0.6761  0.053  0.18
Vardi 1988   12  0.4054  0.0016  0.1211  0.4864  0.0318  0.12
Wasowski 1980   52  0.2641  0.0052  0.0457  0.0459  0.0555  0.04
Zimerman 1975   5  0.428  0.0310  0.119  0.5462  0.0412  0.15
Average   3  0.446  0.076  0.222  0.6760  0.061  0.20
Random 1   67  -0.0352  0.0067  0.0167  0.0135  0.0567  0.02
Random 2   65  0.1040  0.0065  0.0265  0.029  0.5225  0.10
Random 3   66  -0.0245  0.0066  0.0266  0.0224  0.1451  0.05

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).