The website has a plethora of good information, but it is not well organized. I don't really know where your definition of DR resides.
Yes, my site could use a facelift.
Especially since indenting seems broken with newer browsers.
But a simple search for "Photographic Dynamic Range" would have produced:
Engineering and Photographic Dynamic Range (2009-03-02)
Photographic Dynamic Range Summary (2009-03-04)
In short, all Dynamic Range (DR) determination are fundamentally an exploration of the low end of the Photon Transfer Curve (PTC).
It's really just a question of what intersection you're looking for.
Since we can model the low end if we know read noise and gain (or Full Well Capacity (FWC) ) we can predict these figures.
I routinely predict the Nikon numbers and the predictions are always slightly above, but close to, the measured figures.
Because of the shape of the PTC, different SNR criteria produce essentially identical curves with different y-axis offsets.
That's why DxOMark Landscape DR and my PDR agree well, with an offset.
DR falls into two categories, engineering and photographic.
Engineering is at the photosite level whereas photographic is normalized using some criteria.
I don't find engineering DR useful.
I'm entirely satisfied with the criteria I have chosen for my PDR.
If you took my approach but used different criteria, your curves would simply be higher or lower.
So I suggest using my charts and simply adjusting your interpretation of the y-axis accordingly.
This is the intended use of the chart.
For example, for my photographic needs I find that a y-axis value of 6.5 is appropriate.
Look across, I can judge the maximum ISO at which I would get that quality for any particular camera.
If fact, using this (arbitrary) 6.5 criteria I have calculated these ISO values for a number of cameras.
See Photographic Dynamic Range ISOs at PDR of 6.5 Chart
If you want to make predictions for cameras I don't list or to use a different criteria, then I guess you need to "reinvent the wheel".
Just remember that in doing so you need quality data for read noise, and gain; and that is not DxOMark data.
FWIW, my criteria works out to (20 * 800)/(height of sensor) as the S/N target per photosite.