Rabcewiczowa 1932

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		12	0.57	21	0.00	8	0.13	8	0.62	18	0.38	11	0.49
Anderszewski 2003		49	0.40	50	0.00	39	0.06	43	0.13	81	0.02	50	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		55	0.37	54	0.00	52	0.05	55	0.05	76	0.03	64	0.04
Bacha 2000		65	0.33	57	0.00	59	0.04	63	0.04	81	0.03	70	0.03
Badura 1965		60	0.35	63	0.00	64	0.04	60	0.04	75	0.03	80	0.03
Barbosa 1983		38	0.44	14	0.01	20	0.08	21	0.43	33	0.29	19	0.35
Biret 1990		10	0.58	3	0.08	11	0.18	13	0.56	15	0.47	8	0.51
Blet 2003		54	0.38	73	0.00	48	0.06	45	0.06	76	0.04	51	0.05
Block 1995		50	0.40	34	0.00	50	0.05	49	0.05	60	0.04	63	0.04
Blumental 1952		63	0.34	84	0.00	40	0.06	36	0.19	67	0.04	40	0.09
Boshniakovich 1969		42	0.43	24	0.00	58	0.04	58	0.04	64	0.03	81	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		64	0.34	85	0.00	80	0.03	68	0.03	80	0.03	71	0.03
Bunin 1987		35	0.44	38	0.00	42	0.08	35	0.19	52	0.06	32	0.11
Bunin 1987b		36	0.44	45	0.00	43	0.09	38	0.19	54	0.05	33	0.10
Chiu 1999		66	0.33	25	0.00	61	0.04	66	0.04	71	0.04	58	0.04
Cohen 1997		72	0.29	43	0.00	60	0.04	65	0.04	49	0.06	53	0.05
Cortot 1951		15	0.56	12	0.01	12	0.12	15	0.53	7	0.50	9	0.51
Csalog 1996		74	0.28	86	0.00	84	0.02	82	0.02	62	0.05	78	0.03
Czerny 1949		1	0.70	1	0.35	1	0.35	1	0.79	3	0.74	1	0.76
Czerny 1990		14	0.56	41	0.00	22	0.10	23	0.40	55	0.05	26	0.14
Duchoud 2007		30	0.46	74	0.00	41	0.08	37	0.19	60	0.04	39	0.09
Ezaki 2006		6	0.60	6	0.05	10	0.13	11	0.58	33	0.20	20	0.34
Falvay 1989		41	0.43	70	0.00	49	0.06	48	0.06	66	0.04	48	0.05
Farrell 1958		29	0.46	40	0.00	23	0.09	24	0.39	10	0.45	13	0.42
Ferenczy 1958		18	0.52	15	0.01	13	0.14	17	0.49	13	0.46	12	0.47
Fliere 1977		40	0.43	80	0.00	62	0.04	62	0.04	73	0.04	57	0.04
Fou 1978		71	0.31	75	0.00	57	0.04	57	0.04	68	0.04	60	0.04
Francois 1956		5	0.60	2	0.15	2	0.27	6	0.66	11	0.50	4	0.57
Friedman 1923		86	0.13	51	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	59	0.06	69	0.04
Friedman 1923b		87	0.13	76	0.00	74	0.03	69	0.03	48	0.06	65	0.04
Friedman 1930		59	0.35	37	0.00	47	0.05	50	0.05	53	0.05	52	0.05
Garcia 2007		81	0.19	64	0.00	81	0.02	79	0.02	80	0.03	87	0.02
Garcia 2007b		82	0.19	87	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	71	0.03	89	0.02
Gierzod 1998		23	0.49	42	0.00	25	0.10	22	0.42	48	0.06	24	0.16
Gornostaeva 1994		2	0.67	5	0.05	3	0.22	3	0.72	10	0.54	2	0.62
Groot 1988		25	0.47	58	0.00	38	0.06	40	0.18	53	0.04	44	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		39	0.44	8	0.03	15	0.15	16	0.50	55	0.04	27	0.14
Hatto 1993		83	0.18	77	0.00	76	0.02	83	0.02	73	0.03	88	0.02
Hatto 1997		67	0.32	60	0.00	32	0.07	33	0.22	52	0.05	36	0.10
Horowitz 1949		61	0.34	81	0.00	79	0.03	77	0.03	83	0.03	74	0.03
Indjic 1988		84	0.18	88	0.00	75	0.02	80	0.02	76	0.03	86	0.02
Kapell 1951		16	0.54	46	0.00	21	0.11	18	0.46	30	0.32	16	0.38
Kissin 1993		68	0.32	55	0.00	71	0.03	74	0.03	71	0.04	76	0.03
Kushner 1989		27	0.47	82	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	58	0.04	61	0.04
Luisada 1991		47	0.40	65	0.00	56	0.04	61	0.04	65	0.04	55	0.04
Lushtak 2004		48	0.40	59	0.00	28	0.06	27	0.32	46	0.06	25	0.14
Malcuzynski 1961		20	0.50	78	0.00	29	0.07	29	0.26	79	0.03	38	0.09
Magaloff 1978		24	0.48	4	0.05	19	0.09	34	0.20	70	0.03	41	0.08
Magin 1975		73	0.28	89	0.00	82	0.02	81	0.02	82	0.03	84	0.02
Michalowski 1933		31	0.46	20	0.00	24	0.11	20	0.43	22	0.37	15	0.40
Milkina 1970		43	0.43	19	0.00	36	0.06	39	0.18	51	0.05	37	0.09
Mohovich 1999		13	0.56	29	0.00	17	0.12	12	0.57	33	0.23	17	0.36
Moravec 1969		46	0.41	39	0.00	55	0.05	53	0.05	73	0.03	54	0.04
Morozova 2008		33	0.45	83	0.00	33	0.07	31	0.23	57	0.04	35	0.10
Neighaus 1950		7	0.60	9	0.03	4	0.14	4	0.70	26	0.36	10	0.50
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.27	71	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	75	0.03	83	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		21	0.50	18	0.01	30	0.06	30	0.25	64	0.04	34	0.10
Osinska 1989		3	0.65	11	0.01	5	0.11	2	0.72	9	0.50	3	0.60
Pachmann 1927		78	0.24	28	0.00	72	0.03	75	0.03	66	0.04	75	0.03
Paderewski 1930		28	0.47	10	0.01	31	0.08	28	0.29	47	0.06	29	0.13
Perlemuter 1992		45	0.42	90	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.13	54	0.04	45	0.07
Pierdomenico 2008		37	0.44	52	0.00	54	0.05	51	0.05	51	0.05	49	0.05
Poblocka 1999		19	0.50	32	0.00	27	0.08	26	0.34	48	0.05	28	0.13
Rabcewiczowa 1932		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rachmaninoff 1923		51	0.39	61	0.00	46	0.06	46	0.06	77	0.03	59	0.04
Rangell 2001		44	0.42	36	0.00	34	0.07	41	0.16	67	0.03	46	0.07
Richter 1976		77	0.25	72	0.00	86	0.02	84	0.02	86	0.02	85	0.02
Rosen 1989		17	0.54	27	0.00	18	0.15	14	0.54	28	0.31	14	0.41
Rosenthal 1930		34	0.45	22	0.00	37	0.07	42	0.15	33	0.30	22	0.21
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.22	62	0.00	69	0.03	76	0.03	58	0.04	77	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		79	0.22	48	0.00	70	0.04	67	0.04	47	0.05	67	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		56	0.37	31	0.00	65	0.05	52	0.05	42	0.10	47	0.07
Rosenthal 1931d		76	0.26	23	0.00	66	0.04	64	0.04	60	0.04	66	0.04
Rossi 2007		52	0.39	56	0.00	45	0.04	59	0.04	11	0.39	30	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		85	0.15	66	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	74	0.03	82	0.02
Rubinstein 1952		58	0.36	47	0.00	67	0.03	72	0.03	54	0.06	68	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		32	0.45	30	0.00	35	0.07	32	0.23	41	0.13	23	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		57	0.37	44	0.00	63	0.06	47	0.06	71	0.03	62	0.04
Shebanova 2002		62	0.34	67	0.00	78	0.03	73	0.03	77	0.03	79	0.03
Smith 1975		4	0.62	17	0.01	6	0.12	5	0.68	16	0.38	7	0.51
Sokolov 2002		11	0.57	26	0.00	14	0.13	10	0.58	39	0.21	18	0.35
Sztompka 1959		8	0.59	7	0.04	7	0.14	9	0.59	11	0.47	5	0.53
Tomsic 1995		26	0.47	16	0.01	26	0.09	25	0.36	57	0.04	31	0.12
Uninsky 1932		22	0.50	35	0.00	16	0.12	19	0.45	35	0.18	21	0.28
Uninsky 1971		9	0.59	13	0.01	9	0.14	7	0.62	15	0.45	6	0.53
Wasowski 1980		53	0.39	69	0.00	51	0.05	54	0.05	62	0.04	56	0.04
Zak 1937		70	0.31	79	0.00	77	0.03	71	0.03	80	0.03	72	0.03
Zak 1951		69	0.32	68	0.00	68	0.03	70	0.03	72	0.04	73	0.03
Random 1		90	-0.10	53	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		88	0.04	33	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	11	0.36	42	0.08
Random 3		89	0.03	49	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	23	0.32	43	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).