Farrell 1958

Performance		0-Rank	0-Score	1-Rank	1-Score	2-Rank	2-Score	3-Rank	3-Score	3R-Rank	3R-Score	4-Rank	4-Score	NED
Afanassiev 2001		28	0.47	10	0.02	51	0.05	45	0.05	70	0.03	61	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		58	0.40	85	0.00	53	0.04	48	0.04	77	0.03	76	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		43	0.44	46	0.00	47	0.04	60	0.04	67	0.04	64	0.04
Bacha 2000		56	0.41	39	0.00	80	0.03	73	0.03	62	0.04	66	0.03
Badura 1965		84	0.25	74	0.00	84	0.04	55	0.04	79	0.03	81	0.03
Barbosa 1983		66	0.38	81	0.00	48	0.04	56	0.04	53	0.05	57	0.04
Biret 1990		1	0.64	2	0.11	2	0.39	2	0.68	13	0.50	1	0.58
Blet 2003		36	0.46	50	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.16	71	0.04	46	0.08
Block 1995		60	0.40	19	0.01	19	0.07	29	0.27	40	0.11	17	0.17
Blumental 1952		76	0.31	35	0.00	57	0.04	61	0.04	53	0.05	63	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		45	0.43	38	0.00	20	0.08	25	0.29	38	0.16	14	0.22
Brailowsky 1960		19	0.50	8	0.03	29	0.08	30	0.26	46	0.06	24	0.12
Bunin 1987		13	0.51	37	0.00	28	0.13	18	0.36	60	0.04	29	0.12
Bunin 1987b		11	0.51	14	0.01	27	0.09	17	0.36	59	0.04	27	0.12
Chiu 1999		37	0.46	24	0.00	7	0.08	12	0.44	40	0.17	9	0.27
Cohen 1997		68	0.37	66	0.00	45	0.05	46	0.05	31	0.23	33	0.11
Cortot 1951		8	0.52	41	0.00	14	0.09	7	0.48	16	0.36	4	0.42
Csalog 1996		52	0.43	31	0.00	78	0.03	75	0.03	67	0.04	75	0.03
Czerny 1949		35	0.46	44	0.00	33	0.07	33	0.23	51	0.06	28	0.12
Czerny 1990		49	0.43	86	0.00	70	0.03	72	0.03	72	0.04	83	0.03
Duchoud 2007		4	0.54	3	0.04	15	0.08	20	0.34	38	0.18	11	0.25
Ezaki 2006		40	0.45	20	0.01	43	0.05	43	0.10	78	0.03	51	0.05
Falvay 1989		7	0.52	4	0.04	4	0.12	6	0.49	47	0.06	16	0.17
Farrell 1958		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ferenczy 1958		38	0.46	53	0.00	52	0.04	51	0.04	39	0.14	50	0.07
Fliere 1977		22	0.49	82	0.00	39	0.07	38	0.18	68	0.04	44	0.08
Fou 1978		27	0.47	9	0.02	8	0.10	13	0.40	55	0.05	21	0.14
Francois 1956		29	0.47	18	0.01	26	0.07	21	0.33	48	0.05	23	0.13
Friedman 1923		81	0.27	56	0.00	60	0.03	71	0.03	27	0.26	43	0.09
Friedman 1923b		79	0.27	22	0.01	58	0.04	54	0.04	28	0.27	35	0.10
Friedman 1930		83	0.25	73	0.00	61	0.04	58	0.04	68	0.04	59	0.04
Garcia 2007		86	0.24	61	0.00	81	0.03	79	0.03	60	0.04	80	0.03
Garcia 2007b		82	0.26	63	0.00	76	0.04	57	0.04	32	0.24	37	0.10
Gierzod 1998		44	0.44	40	0.00	62	0.03	76	0.03	63	0.04	79	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		5	0.54	21	0.01	11	0.05	23	0.33	33	0.22	10	0.27
Groot 1988		18	0.50	67	0.00	36	0.06	32	0.24	59	0.04	36	0.10
Harasiewicz 1955		73	0.33	78	0.00	32	0.06	31	0.25	78	0.03	42	0.09
Hatto 1993		78	0.28	87	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.03	89	0.02
Hatto 1997		59	0.40	88	0.00	71	0.04	63	0.04	40	0.11	49	0.07
Horowitz 1949		24	0.49	6	0.03	16	0.08	11	0.44	37	0.12	13	0.23
Indjic 1988		77	0.29	83	0.00	86	0.03	64	0.03	73	0.03	74	0.03
Kapell 1951		6	0.52	17	0.01	25	0.07	22	0.33	46	0.07	19	0.15
Kissin 1993		67	0.37	51	0.00	59	0.03	67	0.03	67	0.04	72	0.03
Kushner 1989		46	0.43	43	0.00	64	0.03	82	0.03	79	0.03	69	0.03
Luisada 1991		26	0.48	72	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.14	50	0.06	38	0.09
Lushtak 2004		16	0.50	13	0.01	5	0.13	4	0.54	54	0.05	18	0.16
Malcuzynski 1961		17	0.50	52	0.00	46	0.04	53	0.04	73	0.03	70	0.03
Magaloff 1978		15	0.50	23	0.00	21	0.09	14	0.39	71	0.03	31	0.11
Magin 1975		80	0.27	68	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	86	0.02	86	0.02
Michalowski 1933		85	0.25	89	0.00	69	0.03	81	0.03	71	0.04	71	0.03
Milkina 1970		9	0.51	57	0.00	37	0.06	37	0.19	72	0.04	39	0.09
Mohovich 1999		55	0.41	59	0.00	73	0.04	62	0.04	86	0.02	82	0.03
Moravec 1969		39	0.46	33	0.00	50	0.04	50	0.04	75	0.03	67	0.03
Morozova 2008		32	0.46	32	0.00	17	0.07	15	0.37	51	0.05	22	0.14
Neighaus 1950		2	0.61	1	0.45	1	0.44	1	0.70	22	0.41	2	0.54
Niedzielski 1931		41	0.45	64	0.00	54	0.04	47	0.04	50	0.05	56	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		10	0.51	42	0.00	35	0.07	36	0.20	76	0.03	45	0.08
Osinska 1989		21	0.49	75	0.00	10	0.06	9	0.46	33	0.17	8	0.28
Pachmann 1927		65	0.39	34	0.00	30	0.07	34	0.21	53	0.05	34	0.10
Paderewski 1930		51	0.43	7	0.03	9	0.08	28	0.27	27	0.21	12	0.24
Perlemuter 1992		74	0.33	11	0.02	18	0.06	26	0.29	69	0.04	30	0.11
Pierdomenico 2008		61	0.39	54	0.00	56	0.04	49	0.04	63	0.04	55	0.04
Poblocka 1999		12	0.51	27	0.00	24	0.06	19	0.35	64	0.04	25	0.12
Rabcewiczowa 1932		33	0.46	47	0.00	12	0.06	10	0.45	24	0.39	3	0.42
Rachmaninoff 1923		34	0.46	5	0.04	6	0.15	5	0.52	31	0.20	6	0.32
Rangell 2001		23	0.49	29	0.00	34	0.06	35	0.20	55	0.04	41	0.09
Richter 1976		75	0.31	84	0.00	82	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.03	87	0.02
Rosen 1989		14	0.50	48	0.00	31	0.07	27	0.29	41	0.14	15	0.20
Rosenthal 1930		47	0.43	36	0.00	55	0.04	52	0.04	61	0.04	62	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		72	0.34	71	0.00	75	0.03	66	0.03	46	0.06	58	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		71	0.34	55	0.00	67	0.03	78	0.03	59	0.04	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		57	0.41	60	0.00	72	0.03	69	0.03	69	0.03	85	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		70	0.36	49	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	47	0.05	65	0.04
Rossi 2007		87	0.11	65	0.00	83	0.03	74	0.03	39	0.10	52	0.05
Rubinstein 1939		50	0.43	26	0.00	49	0.04	59	0.04	19	0.39	26	0.12
Rubinstein 1952		63	0.39	79	0.00	79	0.03	68	0.03	48	0.07	54	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		25	0.48	12	0.01	40	0.05	42	0.13	69	0.04	48	0.07
Schilhawsky 1960		64	0.39	76	0.00	66	0.03	77	0.03	72	0.03	77	0.03
Shebanova 2002		62	0.39	80	0.00	77	0.03	85	0.03	79	0.03	78	0.03
Smith 1975		3	0.54	16	0.01	3	0.25	3	0.62	40	0.14	7	0.29
Sokolov 2002		48	0.43	90	0.00	68	0.03	65	0.03	78	0.03	68	0.03
Sztompka 1959		31	0.47	69	0.00	38	0.07	39	0.18	55	0.05	40	0.09
Tomsic 1995		42	0.45	30	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.10	76	0.03	53	0.05
Uninsky 1932		69	0.36	58	0.00	65	0.03	84	0.03	46	0.06	60	0.04
Uninsky 1971		54	0.42	28	0.00	63	0.03	70	0.03	71	0.03	73	0.03
Wasowski 1980		20	0.50	15	0.01	13	0.08	8	0.47	21	0.33	5	0.39
Zak 1937		30	0.47	45	0.00	22	0.09	16	0.37	48	0.06	20	0.15
Zak 1951		53	0.42	25	0.00	23	0.07	24	0.32	67	0.04	32	0.11
Random 1		90	-0.02	62	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	66	0.03	88	0.02
Random 2		88	0.01	70	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	18	0.32	47	0.08
Random 3		89	0.00	77	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	80	0.02	90	0.01

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).