Richter 1960

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   49  0.3746  0.0050  0.0547  0.0565  0.0362  0.04
Ax 1995   31  0.4354  0.0047  0.0734  0.0764  0.0452  0.05
Bacha 1998   59  0.3120  0.0060  0.0548  0.0548  0.0645  0.05
Barbosa 1983   17  0.4836  0.0011  0.1610  0.5233  0.116  0.24
BenOr 1989   47  0.3966  0.0052  0.0552  0.0564  0.0463  0.04
Biret 1990   14  0.4957  0.0021  0.1119  0.3947  0.0718  0.17
Brailowsky 1960   11  0.4928  0.0022  0.1122  0.3353  0.0622  0.14
Chiu 1999   57  0.3355  0.0054  0.0455  0.0452  0.0556  0.04
Clidat 1994   20  0.4758  0.0018  0.0918  0.4143  0.0621  0.16
Cohen 1997   52  0.3721  0.0041  0.0460  0.0416  0.4326  0.13
Cortot 1951   43  0.4139  0.0043  0.0461  0.0412  0.4925  0.14
Csalog 1996   39  0.4244  0.0034  0.0735  0.0758  0.0539  0.06
Czerny 1989   4  0.546  0.015  0.164  0.6241  0.088  0.22
Ezaki 2006   25  0.4529  0.0030  0.0729  0.1859  0.0531  0.09
Falvay 1989   9  0.517  0.0119  0.0916  0.4353  0.0716  0.17
Fiorentino 1962   38  0.4231  0.0035  0.0737  0.0760  0.0451  0.05
Fliere 1977   10  0.494  0.017  0.1214  0.4550  0.0620  0.16
Fou 1978   44  0.4126  0.0033  0.0733  0.1462  0.0436  0.07
Francois 1956   61  0.2916  0.0056  0.0462  0.0463  0.0366  0.03
Goldenweiser 1946   19  0.4710  0.0025  0.0827  0.2224  0.315  0.26
Gornostaeva 1994   48  0.3843  0.0049  0.0541  0.0551  0.0553  0.05
Groot 1988   22  0.462  0.0614  0.1123  0.3054  0.0627  0.13
Hatto 1993   13  0.4913  0.008  0.167  0.5655  0.0615  0.18
Hatto 1997   24  0.4623  0.0016  0.0813  0.4754  0.0617  0.17
Horszowski 1983   54  0.3567  0.0058  0.0544  0.0538  0.0542  0.05
Indjic 2001   26  0.4547  0.0017  0.1015  0.4538  0.0813  0.19
Katin 1996   58  0.3327  0.0051  0.0542  0.0561  0.0459  0.04
Kiepura 1999   32  0.4351  0.0038  0.0543  0.0558  0.0541  0.05
Korecka 1992   53  0.3548  0.0059  0.0454  0.0463  0.0457  0.04
Kushner 1990   23  0.4663  0.0032  0.0731  0.1562  0.0434  0.08
Lilamand 2001   64  0.1164  0.0064  0.0456  0.0461  0.0365  0.03
Luisada 1990   34  0.4324  0.0027  0.0726  0.2346  0.0923  0.14
Luisada 2008   51  0.3733  0.0048  0.0546  0.0559  0.0548  0.05
Lushtak 2004   5  0.549  0.004  0.135  0.6139  0.0710  0.21
Malcuzynski 1951   15  0.4835  0.0020  0.0921  0.3745  0.0819  0.17
Malcuzynski 1961   7  0.5237  0.006  0.118  0.5454  0.0712  0.19
Magaloff 1977   18  0.4838  0.0010  0.1312  0.5115  0.492  0.50
Magin 1975   28  0.4561  0.0040  0.0551  0.0553  0.0738  0.06
Meguri 1997   36  0.438  0.0131  0.0732  0.1439  0.0535  0.08
Milkina 1970   50  0.3750  0.0042  0.0459  0.0459  0.0558  0.04
Mohovich 1999   16  0.4812  0.0015  0.0917  0.4155  0.0524  0.14
Nezu 2005   42  0.4249  0.0045  0.0540  0.0559  0.0550  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   40  0.4225  0.0046  0.0736  0.0758  0.0447  0.05
Olejniczak 1990   6  0.5318  0.009  0.146  0.5846  0.0711  0.20
Osinska 1989   35  0.4315  0.0039  0.0458  0.0461  0.0455  0.04
Perlemuter 1992   60  0.3141  0.0061  0.0463  0.0449  0.0554  0.04
Poblocka 1999   45  0.3917  0.0044  0.0553  0.0559  0.0543  0.05
Rangell 2001   21  0.4730  0.0024  0.1025  0.2631  0.324  0.29
Richter 1960   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Richter 1961   1  0.751  0.821  0.801  0.911  0.951  0.93
Rosen 1989   37  0.4259  0.0037  0.0550  0.0563  0.0461  0.04
Rubinstein 1939   41  0.4232  0.0029  0.0830  0.1656  0.0532  0.09
Rubinstein 1952   56  0.3434  0.0057  0.0549  0.0564  0.0464  0.04
Rubinstein 1966   55  0.3419  0.0055  0.0457  0.0461  0.0560  0.04
Rudanovskaya 2007   46  0.3960  0.0053  0.0464  0.0442  0.0649  0.05
Shebanova 2002   12  0.4962  0.0012  0.1611  0.5227  0.393  0.45
Smith 1975   63  0.2742  0.0062  0.0545  0.0556  0.0644  0.05
Sztompka 1959   62  0.2745  0.0063  0.0639  0.0663  0.0446  0.05
Tanyel 1992   3  0.575  0.013  0.303  0.6939  0.087  0.23
Tsujii 2005   27  0.4553  0.0023  0.1020  0.3861  0.0429  0.12
Uninsky 1959   8  0.5240  0.0013  0.159  0.5251  0.0614  0.18
Vardi 1988   33  0.4311  0.0026  0.0824  0.2754  0.0528  0.12
Wasowski 1980   29  0.4422  0.0036  0.0638  0.0655  0.0637  0.06
Zimerman 1975   30  0.4414  0.0028  0.0728  0.2053  0.0630  0.11
Average   2  0.603  0.022  0.452  0.7855  0.069  0.22
Random 1   66  -0.0265  0.0066  0.0266  0.0222  0.2040  0.06
Random 2   65  0.0252  0.0065  0.0265  0.0214  0.3933  0.09
Random 3   67  -0.0656  0.0067  0.0167  0.0158  0.0367  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).