Cohen 1997

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   9  0.5332  0.0013  0.1013  0.5253  0.066  0.18
Ax 1995   32  0.4736  0.0040  0.0641  0.0662  0.0549  0.05
Bacha 1998   49  0.4346  0.0060  0.0635  0.0663  0.0444  0.05
Barbosa 1983   22  0.499  0.0216  0.0916  0.4764  0.0323  0.12
BenOr 1989   38  0.4544  0.0042  0.0638  0.0663  0.0450  0.05
Biret 1990   47  0.4345  0.0050  0.0544  0.0562  0.0466  0.04
Brailowsky 1960   41  0.4449  0.0047  0.0642  0.0653  0.0636  0.06
Chiu 1999   40  0.4542  0.0054  0.0636  0.0662  0.0542  0.05
Clidat 1994   36  0.4662  0.0031  0.0832  0.1456  0.0632  0.09
Cohen 1997   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Cortot 1951   62  0.3451  0.0064  0.0552  0.0561  0.0467  0.04
Csalog 1996   1  0.611  0.311  0.301  0.7141  0.071  0.22
Czerny 1989   52  0.4218  0.0145  0.0553  0.0564  0.0462  0.04
Ezaki 2006   21  0.5048  0.0026  0.0924  0.2860  0.0519  0.12
Falvay 1989   26  0.4960  0.0017  0.108  0.5547  0.064  0.18
Fiorentino 1962   43  0.4463  0.0055  0.0734  0.0756  0.0639  0.06
Fliere 1977   10  0.5335  0.0022  0.0921  0.3558  0.0516  0.13
Fou 1978   39  0.4561  0.0053  0.0554  0.0563  0.0460  0.04
Francois 1956   7  0.545  0.049  0.1212  0.5264  0.0324  0.12
Goldenweiser 1946   64  0.3241  0.0061  0.0556  0.0554  0.0459  0.04
Gornostaeva 1994   55  0.4043  0.0057  0.0558  0.0560  0.0465  0.04
Groot 1988   44  0.4465  0.0048  0.0555  0.0552  0.0652  0.05
Hatto 1993   51  0.4228  0.0037  0.0557  0.0556  0.0653  0.05
Hatto 1997   48  0.4337  0.0035  0.0559  0.0554  0.0646  0.05
Horszowski 1983   59  0.3857  0.0062  0.0464  0.0441  0.0557  0.04
Indjic 2001   50  0.4320  0.0138  0.0639  0.0656  0.0638  0.06
Katin 1996   19  0.5012  0.0224  0.0925  0.2760  0.0521  0.12
Kiepura 1999   31  0.4738  0.0046  0.0640  0.0665  0.0356  0.04
Korecka 1992   46  0.4327  0.0052  0.0461  0.0462  0.0461  0.04
Kushner 1990   17  0.5129  0.0015  0.0917  0.3955  0.0422  0.12
Lilamand 2001   45  0.448  0.0221  0.0929  0.2055  0.0431  0.09
Luisada 1990   57  0.3915  0.0144  0.0545  0.0556  0.0548  0.05
Luisada 2008   58  0.3824  0.0151  0.0643  0.0659  0.0447  0.05
Lushtak 2004   23  0.4925  0.007  0.147  0.5664  0.0318  0.13
Malcuzynski 1951   35  0.4755  0.0039  0.0546  0.0552  0.0554  0.05
Malcuzynski 1961   27  0.4856  0.0029  0.0727  0.2246  0.0627  0.11
Magaloff 1977   63  0.3347  0.0063  0.0462  0.0456  0.0563  0.04
Magin 1975   54  0.4164  0.0056  0.0550  0.0563  0.0543  0.05
Meguri 1997   18  0.5111  0.0214  0.0926  0.2547  0.0528  0.11
Milkina 1970   6  0.5521  0.016  0.139  0.5464  0.0410  0.15
Mohovich 1999   8  0.536  0.033  0.224  0.6658  0.055  0.18
Nezu 2005   42  0.4452  0.0032  0.0731  0.1564  0.0433  0.08
Ohlsson 1999   5  0.5540  0.0012  0.0911  0.5359  0.057  0.16
Olejniczak 1990   61  0.3767  0.0059  0.0551  0.0558  0.0555  0.05
Osinska 1989   15  0.5213  0.018  0.146  0.5964  0.0317  0.13
Perlemuter 1992   37  0.4519  0.0133  0.0633  0.1143  0.0534  0.07
Poblocka 1999   34  0.4753  0.0043  0.0547  0.0552  0.0640  0.05
Rangell 2001   30  0.4822  0.0141  0.0637  0.0661  0.0451  0.05
Richter 1960   53  0.4126  0.0036  0.0560  0.0537  0.0737  0.06
Richter 1961   60  0.3733  0.0049  0.0549  0.0556  0.0541  0.05
Rosen 1989   14  0.5214  0.0110  0.1010  0.5353  0.059  0.16
Rubinstein 1939   29  0.4839  0.0025  0.0923  0.2964  0.0426  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   12  0.5210  0.0220  0.1018  0.3962  0.0515  0.14
Rubinstein 1966   16  0.5117  0.0130  0.0828  0.2159  0.0530  0.10
Rudanovskaya 2007   33  0.474  0.0511  0.1019  0.3848  0.0512  0.14
Shebanova 2002   24  0.4930  0.0027  0.0922  0.3063  0.0429  0.11
Smith 1975   25  0.4916  0.0128  0.0830  0.1955  0.0625  0.11
Sztompka 1959   28  0.4823  0.0134  0.0548  0.0557  0.0545  0.05
Tanyel 1992   4  0.563  0.115  0.295  0.6364  0.0313  0.14
Tsujii 2005   11  0.5366  0.0019  0.1215  0.4961  0.058  0.16
Uninsky 1959   2  0.592  0.162  0.242  0.7156  0.053  0.19
Vardi 1988   20  0.5058  0.0023  0.1020  0.3764  0.0420  0.12
Wasowski 1980   56  0.3931  0.0058  0.0463  0.0464  0.0458  0.04
Zimerman 1975   13  0.5234  0.0018  0.1014  0.4964  0.0414  0.14
Average   3  0.577  0.034  0.233  0.7057  0.062  0.20
Random 1   67  -0.0659  0.0067  0.0167  0.0125  0.1364  0.04
Random 2   65  0.0850  0.0065  0.0365  0.032  0.6111  0.14
Random 3   66  -0.0554  0.0066  0.0266  0.0217  0.2435  0.07

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).