Rossi 2007

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

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).