Goldenweiser 1946

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   49  0.3721  0.0043  0.0548  0.0560  0.0461  0.04
Ax 1995   8  0.5210  0.0211  0.1311  0.5246  0.0814  0.20
Bacha 1998   62  0.2557  0.0061  0.0551  0.0562  0.0546  0.05
Barbosa 1983   33  0.4135  0.0044  0.0556  0.0558  0.0547  0.05
BenOr 1989   36  0.4066  0.0040  0.0547  0.0560  0.0463  0.04
Biret 1990   3  0.563  0.082  0.223  0.7127  0.263  0.43
Brailowsky 1960   9  0.524  0.064  0.186  0.6155  0.0615  0.19
Chiu 1999   56  0.3232  0.0058  0.0552  0.0554  0.0459  0.04
Clidat 1994   29  0.4351  0.0039  0.0638  0.0654  0.0550  0.05
Cohen 1997   63  0.2562  0.0062  0.0464  0.0460  0.0462  0.04
Cortot 1951   31  0.4220  0.0135  0.0642  0.065  0.6117  0.19
Csalog 1996   21  0.4623  0.0028  0.0827  0.2250  0.0629  0.11
Czerny 1989   12  0.4928  0.0017  0.1814  0.4951  0.0522  0.16
Ezaki 2006   41  0.3960  0.0045  0.0554  0.0547  0.0642  0.05
Falvay 1989   5  0.5214  0.017  0.128  0.6057  0.0616  0.19
Fiorentino 1962   23  0.466  0.0314  0.1512  0.5236  0.137  0.26
Fliere 1977   35  0.4122  0.0033  0.0733  0.1355  0.0534  0.08
Fou 1978   22  0.4656  0.0021  0.1620  0.4348  0.0621  0.16
Francois 1956   57  0.3152  0.0054  0.0549  0.0558  0.0557  0.05
Goldenweiser 1946   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Gornostaeva 1994   20  0.4724  0.0022  0.1722  0.3848  0.0624  0.15
Groot 1988   1  0.581  0.431  0.421  0.7528  0.301  0.47
Hatto 1993   37  0.4063  0.0030  0.0828  0.2062  0.0433  0.09
Hatto 1997   52  0.3740  0.0050  0.0553  0.0560  0.0548  0.05
Horszowski 1983   59  0.3037  0.0056  0.0643  0.0651  0.0443  0.05
Indjic 2001   46  0.3847  0.0041  0.0645  0.0664  0.0454  0.05
Katin 1996   40  0.3933  0.0029  0.0626  0.2355  0.0627  0.12
Kiepura 1999   11  0.4942  0.0018  0.2018  0.4554  0.0523  0.15
Korecka 1992   45  0.3958  0.0046  0.0461  0.0447  0.0836  0.06
Kushner 1990   24  0.4553  0.0031  0.0631  0.1755  0.0532  0.09
Lilamand 2001   64  0.1059  0.0064  0.0462  0.0462  0.0365  0.03
Luisada 1990   54  0.3648  0.0051  0.0550  0.0559  0.0651  0.05
Luisada 2008   48  0.3829  0.0052  0.0641  0.0650  0.0740  0.06
Lushtak 2004   25  0.4549  0.0024  0.0923  0.3549  0.0625  0.14
Malcuzynski 1951   7  0.5216  0.018  0.149  0.5954  0.0618  0.19
Malcuzynski 1961   13  0.4925  0.0016  0.2016  0.4753  0.0719  0.18
Magaloff 1977   27  0.449  0.0215  0.1619  0.4519  0.404  0.42
Magin 1975   32  0.4230  0.0025  0.0730  0.1842  0.0926  0.13
Meguri 1997   16  0.482  0.1112  0.1217  0.4624  0.345  0.40
Milkina 1970   44  0.3961  0.0027  0.0925  0.2460  0.0528  0.11
Mohovich 1999   43  0.3931  0.0026  0.0632  0.1559  0.0435  0.08
Nezu 2005   53  0.3767  0.0055  0.0555  0.0558  0.0553  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   42  0.3936  0.0048  0.0559  0.0562  0.0460  0.04
Olejniczak 1990   28  0.4346  0.0032  0.0829  0.1847  0.0731  0.11
Osinska 1989   19  0.4750  0.0020  0.1421  0.4240  0.1013  0.20
Perlemuter 1992   61  0.2518  0.0163  0.0557  0.0542  0.0544  0.05
Poblocka 1999   50  0.3764  0.0049  0.0646  0.0658  0.0545  0.05
Rangell 2001   60  0.3041  0.0060  0.0463  0.0461  0.0464  0.04
Richter 1960   18  0.4711  0.0223  0.1124  0.3127  0.226  0.26
Richter 1961   14  0.4817  0.0119  0.1315  0.4715  0.422  0.44
Rosen 1989   4  0.5315  0.015  0.164  0.6656  0.0520  0.18
Rubinstein 1939   15  0.485  0.0610  0.1310  0.5746  0.089  0.21
Rubinstein 1952   39  0.3927  0.0034  0.0637  0.0661  0.0456  0.05
Rubinstein 1966   55  0.3338  0.0042  0.0644  0.0655  0.0639  0.06
Rudanovskaya 2007   38  0.4026  0.0047  0.0558  0.0549  0.0552  0.05
Shebanova 2002   51  0.3712  0.0157  0.0639  0.0657  0.0449  0.05
Smith 1975   17  0.4713  0.0113  0.1513  0.5135  0.118  0.24
Sztompka 1959   47  0.3854  0.0053  0.0640  0.0653  0.0638  0.06
Tanyel 1992   6  0.528  0.036  0.145  0.6644  0.0712  0.21
Tsujii 2005   30  0.4234  0.0037  0.0834  0.0862  0.0441  0.06
Uninsky 1959   10  0.5219  0.019  0.157  0.6146  0.0710  0.21
Vardi 1988   34  0.4139  0.0038  0.0835  0.0856  0.0537  0.06
Wasowski 1980   58  0.3155  0.0059  0.0460  0.0463  0.0458  0.04
Zimerman 1975   26  0.4444  0.0036  0.0736  0.0764  0.0455  0.05
Average   2  0.577  0.033  0.232  0.7259  0.0611  0.21
Random 1   66  -0.0843  0.0066  0.0266  0.0246  0.0466  0.03
Random 2   67  -0.1465  0.0067  0.0167  0.0167  0.0167  0.01
Random 3   65  0.0345  0.0065  0.0365  0.033  0.4330  0.11

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).