Perlemuter 1992

Performance0-Rank  0-Score1-Rank  1-Score2-Rank  2-Score3-Rank  3-Score3R-Rank  3R-Score4-Rank  4-Score  NED
Ashkenazy 1981   37  0.5313  0.019  0.098  0.3761  0.0510  0.14
Ax 1995   24  0.5567  0.0032  0.0629  0.1454  0.0629  0.09
Bacha 1998   36  0.536  0.0314  0.0730  0.1460  0.0434  0.07
Barbosa 1983   62  0.3737  0.0035  0.0635  0.0661  0.0442  0.05
BenOr 1989   57  0.4323  0.0019  0.0620  0.2262  0.0430  0.09
Biret 1990   44  0.4960  0.0043  0.0461  0.0445  0.0647  0.05
Brailowsky 1960   47  0.4859  0.0056  0.0464  0.0464  0.0366  0.03
Chiu 1999   45  0.4950  0.0053  0.0544  0.0564  0.0454  0.04
Clidat 1994   42  0.5012  0.0145  0.0455  0.0461  0.0559  0.04
Cohen 1997   51  0.4531  0.0057  0.0543  0.0533  0.1136  0.07
Cortot 1951   64  0.2548  0.0064  0.0539  0.0558  0.0463  0.04
Csalog 1996   14  0.5842  0.0023  0.0616  0.2758  0.0514  0.12
Czerny 1989   12  0.5857  0.0028  0.0626  0.1550  0.0525  0.09
Ezaki 2006   11  0.5917  0.0115  0.0718  0.2664  0.0419  0.10
Falvay 1989   32  0.5438  0.0042  0.0548  0.0564  0.0455  0.04
Fiorentino 1962   38  0.5224  0.0026  0.0631  0.1363  0.0533  0.08
Fliere 1977   43  0.4927  0.0050  0.0541  0.0563  0.0351  0.04
Fou 1978   53  0.4561  0.0051  0.0734  0.0762  0.0438  0.05
Francois 1956   52  0.4558  0.0052  0.0537  0.0544  0.0737  0.06
Goldenweiser 1946   39  0.5221  0.0058  0.0462  0.0463  0.0365  0.03
Gornostaeva 1994   63  0.3246  0.0041  0.0457  0.0455  0.0562  0.04
Groot 1988   26  0.5562  0.0049  0.0538  0.0555  0.0548  0.05
Hatto 1993   10  0.5935  0.0021  0.0912  0.2964  0.0418  0.11
Hatto 1997   6  0.6028  0.0013  0.109  0.3664  0.0415  0.12
Horszowski 1983   5  0.6114  0.0129  0.0532  0.1229  0.166  0.14
Indjic 2001   7  0.5947  0.0020  0.0611  0.3046  0.0612  0.13
Katin 1996   17  0.5726  0.005  0.126  0.3953  0.064  0.15
Kiepura 1999   60  0.424  0.048  0.0923  0.1957  0.0423  0.09
Korecka 1992   40  0.5218  0.0138  0.0547  0.0548  0.0639  0.05
Kushner 1990   48  0.4725  0.0034  0.0636  0.0651  0.0441  0.05
Lilamand 2001   27  0.5529  0.0024  0.0624  0.1842  0.0621  0.10
Luisada 1990   49  0.4730  0.0055  0.0545  0.0561  0.0460  0.04
Luisada 2008   58  0.4234  0.0060  0.0458  0.0448  0.0643  0.05
Lushtak 2004   29  0.549  0.0222  0.0715  0.2761  0.0327  0.09
Malcuzynski 1951   46  0.4851  0.0036  0.0540  0.0561  0.0464  0.04
Malcuzynski 1961   55  0.4444  0.0025  0.0722  0.2052  0.0520  0.10
Magaloff 1977   56  0.4464  0.0059  0.0454  0.0452  0.0644  0.05
Magin 1975   20  0.568  0.0216  0.0614  0.2845  0.078  0.14
Meguri 1997   21  0.5616  0.0117  0.0625  0.1845  0.0526  0.09
Milkina 1970   19  0.5643  0.0039  0.0550  0.0558  0.0540  0.05
Mohovich 1999   1  0.661  0.301  0.301  0.7045  0.063  0.20
Nezu 2005   50  0.4640  0.0040  0.0546  0.0561  0.0545  0.05
Ohlsson 1999   3  0.6253  0.0012  0.0713  0.2954  0.0513  0.12
Olejniczak 1990   30  0.5441  0.0046  0.0456  0.0441  0.0749  0.05
Osinska 1989   28  0.5539  0.0027  0.0721  0.2162  0.0424  0.09
Perlemuter 1992   target  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  targettarget  target
Poblocka 1999   35  0.5366  0.0044  0.0452  0.0463  0.0452  0.04
Rangell 2001   25  0.5515  0.0131  0.0627  0.1555  0.0531  0.09
Richter 1960   59  0.4233  0.0063  0.0460  0.0449  0.0557  0.04
Richter 1961   54  0.4419  0.0162  0.0463  0.0461  0.0453  0.04
Rosen 1989   9  0.597  0.0230  0.0628  0.1463  0.0435  0.07
Rubinstein 1939   16  0.5749  0.0018  0.0519  0.2356  0.0517  0.11
Rubinstein 1952   33  0.5420  0.017  0.097  0.3853  0.065  0.15
Rubinstein 1966   23  0.565  0.034  0.204  0.4763  0.049  0.14
Rudanovskaya 2007   15  0.5854  0.0054  0.0451  0.0463  0.0461  0.04
Shebanova 2002   22  0.5622  0.0048  0.0549  0.0564  0.0458  0.04
Smith 1975   18  0.5711  0.016  0.085  0.3958  0.057  0.14
Sztompka 1959   4  0.613  0.153  0.283  0.5838  0.071  0.20
Tanyel 1992   31  0.5410  0.0133  0.0633  0.1149  0.0632  0.08
Tsujii 2005   8  0.5945  0.0011  0.0817  0.2764  0.0422  0.10
Uninsky 1959   13  0.5836  0.0010  0.0810  0.3357  0.0511  0.13
Vardi 1988   34  0.5332  0.0047  0.0459  0.0459  0.0556  0.04
Wasowski 1980   61  0.3755  0.0061  0.0453  0.0462  0.0450  0.04
Zimerman 1975   41  0.5156  0.0037  0.0542  0.0547  0.0646  0.05
Average   2  0.652  0.222  0.382  0.6754  0.062  0.20
Random 1   66  -0.0363  0.0066  0.0266  0.0211  0.4328  0.09
Random 2   65  0.0152  0.0065  0.0365  0.038  0.4816  0.12
Random 3   67  -0.0765  0.0067  0.0167  0.0166  0.0267  0.01

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).