Kushner 1989

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		24	0.59	65	0.00	35	0.09	29	0.25	29	0.17	31	0.21
Anderszewski 2003		44	0.52	35	0.00	45	0.05	48	0.05	23	0.31	43	0.12
Ashkenazy 1981		4	0.69	1	0.33	1	0.33	1	0.82	4	0.62	2	0.71
Bacha 2000		40	0.53	18	0.01	50	0.04	66	0.04	17	0.45	39	0.13
Badura 1965		50	0.51	7	0.03	18	0.08	11	0.48	2	0.62	8	0.55
Barbosa 1983		73	0.42	88	0.00	58	0.03	74	0.03	65	0.04	85	0.03
Biret 1990		39	0.53	62	0.00	60	0.04	52	0.04	62	0.04	81	0.04
Blet 2003		56	0.50	75	0.00	59	0.04	56	0.04	48	0.06	68	0.05
Block 1995		12	0.62	19	0.01	12	0.12	10	0.48	4	0.60	9	0.54
Blumental 1952		68	0.45	41	0.00	32	0.06	34	0.18	13	0.39	28	0.26
Boshniakovich 1969		16	0.61	17	0.01	17	0.08	14	0.41	11	0.56	11	0.48
Brailowsky 1960		49	0.51	66	0.00	70	0.04	59	0.04	37	0.14	61	0.07
Bunin 1987		66	0.46	51	0.00	81	0.04	60	0.04	67	0.04	79	0.04
Bunin 1987b		65	0.46	71	0.00	80	0.04	65	0.04	62	0.04	74	0.04
Chiu 1999		55	0.50	20	0.01	43	0.07	42	0.13	32	0.28	35	0.19
Cohen 1997		80	0.34	26	0.00	78	0.03	85	0.03	45	0.08	69	0.05
Cortot 1951		48	0.51	47	0.00	63	0.03	77	0.03	30	0.26	54	0.09
Csalog 1996		72	0.43	23	0.00	64	0.03	80	0.03	43	0.12	64	0.06
Czerny 1949		43	0.52	68	0.00	33	0.06	38	0.16	36	0.23	36	0.19
Czerny 1990		2	0.70	11	0.01	7	0.21	7	0.60	9	0.52	7	0.56
Duchoud 2007		20	0.60	14	0.01	20	0.07	16	0.40	22	0.43	15	0.41
Ezaki 2006		22	0.59	39	0.00	31	0.07	30	0.24	48	0.06	41	0.12
Falvay 1989		19	0.60	57	0.00	27	0.06	19	0.36	29	0.21	26	0.27
Farrell 1958		71	0.43	36	0.00	82	0.03	79	0.03	82	0.03	83	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		78	0.37	84	0.00	83	0.02	88	0.02	56	0.04	88	0.03
Fliere 1977		5	0.69	15	0.01	5	0.14	4	0.65	18	0.51	5	0.58
Fou 1978		27	0.58	25	0.00	15	0.07	8	0.49	25	0.38	12	0.43
Francois 1956		42	0.52	53	0.00	36	0.07	36	0.17	47	0.05	56	0.09
Friedman 1923		86	0.24	29	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	54	0.06	89	0.03
Friedman 1923b		87	0.24	72	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	54	0.05	80	0.04
Friedman 1930		82	0.32	58	0.00	72	0.04	67	0.04	78	0.03	86	0.03
Garcia 2007		83	0.32	49	0.00	76	0.03	75	0.03	20	0.40	47	0.11
Garcia 2007b		81	0.33	69	0.00	74	0.04	63	0.04	8	0.48	38	0.14
Gierzod 1998		14	0.62	44	0.00	16	0.08	12	0.43	11	0.41	13	0.42
Gornostaeva 1994		6	0.68	55	0.00	11	0.10	13	0.42	29	0.26	19	0.33
Groot 1988		10	0.63	63	0.00	21	0.07	21	0.34	35	0.21	27	0.27
Harasiewicz 1955		59	0.49	56	0.00	26	0.07	32	0.22	36	0.18	33	0.20
Hatto 1993		75	0.38	16	0.01	56	0.05	49	0.05	41	0.13	60	0.08
Hatto 1997		79	0.35	80	0.00	62	0.04	69	0.04	70	0.03	87	0.03
Horowitz 1949		53	0.51	22	0.00	55	0.04	53	0.04	44	0.07	66	0.05
Indjic 1988		76	0.37	31	0.00	57	0.06	45	0.06	59	0.05	67	0.05
Kapell 1951		37	0.54	89	0.00	67	0.04	61	0.04	68	0.04	72	0.04
Kissin 1993		7	0.67	4	0.09	4	0.25	5	0.64	6	0.58	3	0.61
Kushner 1989		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Luisada 1991		23	0.59	81	0.00	25	0.07	20	0.35	27	0.32	18	0.33
Lushtak 2004		58	0.49	24	0.00	40	0.05	39	0.16	43	0.10	40	0.13
Malcuzynski 1961		1	0.75	2	0.15	2	0.30	3	0.69	6	0.53	4	0.60
Magaloff 1978		8	0.65	76	0.00	14	0.09	22	0.32	29	0.22	25	0.27
Magin 1975		13	0.62	10	0.01	8	0.12	9	0.49	7	0.53	10	0.51
Michalowski 1933		74	0.40	21	0.00	24	0.07	27	0.28	23	0.36	21	0.32
Milkina 1970		30	0.57	77	0.00	30	0.07	23	0.31	24	0.33	20	0.32
Mohovich 1999		32	0.56	45	0.00	51	0.04	54	0.04	70	0.04	78	0.04
Moravec 1969		17	0.61	13	0.01	9	0.12	15	0.40	12	0.43	14	0.41
Morozova 2008		11	0.63	5	0.04	6	0.13	6	0.63	3	0.51	6	0.57
Neighaus 1950		35	0.56	90	0.00	29	0.07	28	0.25	54	0.06	44	0.12
Niedzielski 1931		69	0.44	42	0.00	54	0.04	55	0.04	24	0.21	52	0.09
Ohlsson 1999		25	0.59	67	0.00	42	0.07	37	0.16	42	0.12	37	0.14
Osinska 1989		28	0.57	38	0.00	34	0.07	35	0.18	30	0.21	34	0.19
Pachmann 1927		84	0.32	32	0.00	86	0.03	82	0.03	68	0.04	84	0.03
Paderewski 1930		47	0.51	54	0.00	69	0.04	64	0.04	51	0.05	75	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		31	0.56	9	0.02	23	0.08	24	0.30	22	0.39	17	0.34
Pierdomenico 2008		38	0.54	34	0.00	38	0.05	33	0.20	14	0.40	24	0.28
Poblocka 1999		26	0.58	30	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.15	51	0.05	51	0.09
Rabcewiczowa 1932		62	0.47	73	0.00	71	0.04	58	0.04	56	0.05	71	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		63	0.46	48	0.00	46	0.06	46	0.06	35	0.18	49	0.10
Rangell 2001		33	0.56	27	0.00	10	0.10	31	0.22	33	0.21	32	0.21
Richter 1976		18	0.61	8	0.02	22	0.07	25	0.30	23	0.33	23	0.31
Rosen 1989		15	0.61	82	0.00	19	0.07	17	0.37	20	0.39	16	0.38
Rosenthal 1930		41	0.53	33	0.00	61	0.04	71	0.04	36	0.27	50	0.10
Rosenthal 1931		60	0.47	52	0.00	68	0.04	68	0.04	19	0.37	42	0.12
Rosenthal 1931b		70	0.44	78	0.00	75	0.03	73	0.03	25	0.28	55	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		46	0.52	46	0.00	49	0.04	50	0.04	28	0.30	48	0.11
Rosenthal 1931d		67	0.45	28	0.00	79	0.03	76	0.03	23	0.27	53	0.09
Rossi 2007		77	0.37	86	0.00	66	0.03	81	0.03	10	0.41	46	0.11
Rubinstein 1939		85	0.29	85	0.00	87	0.03	78	0.03	61	0.04	82	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		64	0.46	87	0.00	77	0.03	83	0.03	53	0.07	70	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		36	0.55	43	0.00	37	0.06	41	0.13	21	0.40	30	0.23
Schilhawsky 1960		61	0.47	59	0.00	73	0.04	62	0.04	59	0.04	77	0.04
Shebanova 2002		3	0.69	3	0.14	3	0.22	2	0.80	3	0.66	1	0.73
Smith 1975		29	0.57	64	0.00	39	0.05	43	0.12	45	0.05	57	0.08
Sokolov 2002		9	0.63	6	0.03	13	0.13	18	0.36	34	0.27	22	0.31
Sztompka 1959		34	0.56	12	0.01	44	0.05	44	0.10	52	0.06	58	0.08
Tomsic 1995		21	0.59	60	0.00	28	0.06	26	0.28	28	0.21	29	0.24
Uninsky 1932		52	0.51	37	0.00	48	0.04	57	0.04	38	0.14	62	0.07
Uninsky 1971		51	0.51	40	0.00	53	0.04	70	0.04	54	0.05	76	0.04
Wasowski 1980		45	0.52	74	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	26	0.29	45	0.11
Zak 1937		57	0.49	50	0.00	52	0.04	51	0.04	61	0.05	73	0.04
Zak 1951		54	0.50	83	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	52	0.05	65	0.05
Random 1		89	0.02	61	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	20	0.27	63	0.07
Random 2		90	-0.07	70	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3		88	0.08	79	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	22	0.33	59	0.08

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).