Tomsic 1995

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		9	0.66	20	0.01	12	0.10	9	0.49	5	0.52	7	0.50
Anderszewski 2003		66	0.43	15	0.01	26	0.07	27	0.22	24	0.30	30	0.26
Ashkenazy 1981		30	0.58	49	0.00	27	0.07	19	0.30	36	0.19	35	0.24
Bacha 2000		44	0.52	39	0.00	65	0.03	74	0.03	27	0.36	48	0.10
Badura 1965		56	0.48	8	0.06	14	0.10	26	0.24	5	0.58	17	0.37
Barbosa 1983		55	0.49	42	0.00	34	0.05	32	0.19	30	0.36	29	0.26
Biret 1990		50	0.50	57	0.00	60	0.04	70	0.04	46	0.06	74	0.05
Blet 2003		27	0.59	64	0.00	43	0.08	39	0.17	22	0.35	34	0.24
Block 1995		42	0.52	55	0.00	51	0.04	65	0.04	26	0.26	52	0.10
Blumental 1952		79	0.28	48	0.00	75	0.03	72	0.03	79	0.03	86	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		38	0.54	24	0.00	47	0.05	51	0.05	29	0.31	45	0.12
Brailowsky 1960		43	0.52	35	0.00	64	0.04	61	0.04	38	0.12	63	0.07
Bunin 1987		18	0.60	12	0.02	15	0.09	16	0.35	22	0.36	21	0.35
Bunin 1987b		17	0.60	16	0.01	16	0.11	15	0.35	22	0.35	20	0.35
Chiu 1999		69	0.39	65	0.00	69	0.04	62	0.04	74	0.04	75	0.04
Cohen 1997		74	0.36	47	0.00	73	0.03	75	0.03	27	0.28	57	0.09
Cortot 1951		70	0.39	89	0.00	74	0.03	81	0.03	63	0.04	87	0.03
Csalog 1996		59	0.47	58	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	32	0.27	55	0.09
Czerny 1949		51	0.49	59	0.00	50	0.04	63	0.04	33	0.25	51	0.10
Czerny 1990		16	0.61	43	0.00	21	0.09	23	0.28	19	0.31	25	0.29
Duchoud 2007		54	0.49	74	0.00	53	0.04	58	0.04	42	0.12	65	0.07
Ezaki 2006		3	0.72	4	0.10	2	0.14	1	0.64	5	0.64	2	0.64
Falvay 1989		2	0.73	5	0.08	3	0.17	3	0.63	3	0.67	1	0.65
Farrell 1958		62	0.45	25	0.00	72	0.03	76	0.03	44	0.10	72	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		41	0.53	52	0.00	62	0.03	78	0.03	21	0.36	50	0.10
Fliere 1977		22	0.59	36	0.00	32	0.05	25	0.25	28	0.24	31	0.24
Fou 1978		7	0.67	14	0.01	9	0.13	8	0.50	14	0.46	9	0.48
Francois 1956		14	0.62	11	0.02	13	0.12	13	0.38	13	0.47	15	0.42
Friedman 1923		86	0.01	80	0.00	89	0.02	86	0.02	71	0.04	88	0.03
Friedman 1923b		87	0.01	75	0.00	88	0.01	87	0.01	73	0.04	90	0.02
Friedman 1930		85	0.18	82	0.00	84	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.03	83	0.03
Garcia 2007		81	0.26	83	0.00	81	0.02	85	0.02	50	0.06	85	0.03
Garcia 2007b		83	0.21	33	0.00	82	0.03	84	0.03	28	0.26	58	0.09
Gierzod 1998		48	0.51	68	0.00	25	0.08	31	0.19	28	0.19	36	0.19
Gornostaeva 1994		24	0.59	19	0.01	18	0.09	17	0.35	25	0.31	22	0.33
Groot 1988		1	0.73	3	0.11	4	0.18	2	0.64	6	0.55	3	0.59
Harasiewicz 1955		31	0.58	1	0.12	1	0.12	4	0.58	7	0.45	6	0.51
Hatto 1993		73	0.36	45	0.00	56	0.05	50	0.05	67	0.04	81	0.04
Hatto 1997		65	0.43	22	0.01	29	0.06	37	0.18	36	0.13	41	0.15
Horowitz 1949		57	0.48	41	0.00	48	0.05	47	0.05	30	0.21	49	0.10
Indjic 1988		68	0.40	46	0.00	54	0.05	49	0.05	43	0.10	64	0.07
Kapell 1951		37	0.55	86	0.00	63	0.04	69	0.04	52	0.05	77	0.04
Kissin 1993		5	0.70	2	0.12	5	0.17	10	0.47	12	0.48	10	0.47
Kushner 1989		26	0.59	66	0.00	40	0.06	28	0.21	26	0.28	32	0.24
Luisada 1991		32	0.57	18	0.01	24	0.07	20	0.29	24	0.33	23	0.31
Lushtak 2004		15	0.61	6	0.06	7	0.10	12	0.40	13	0.49	11	0.44
Malcuzynski 1961		4	0.72	27	0.00	10	0.11	6	0.54	12	0.45	8	0.49
Magaloff 1978		25	0.59	54	0.00	38	0.05	35	0.18	45	0.09	43	0.13
Magin 1975		58	0.48	51	0.00	55	0.05	54	0.05	27	0.24	47	0.11
Michalowski 1933		82	0.25	76	0.00	76	0.04	67	0.04	66	0.04	78	0.04
Milkina 1970		12	0.63	30	0.00	20	0.07	24	0.27	9	0.45	19	0.35
Mohovich 1999		6	0.70	77	0.00	11	0.17	5	0.55	6	0.61	4	0.58
Moravec 1969		46	0.51	29	0.00	70	0.04	59	0.04	33	0.15	59	0.08
Morozova 2008		45	0.51	13	0.02	31	0.05	38	0.17	40	0.12	42	0.14
Neighaus 1950		8	0.67	21	0.01	8	0.11	7	0.53	14	0.52	5	0.52
Niedzielski 1931		78	0.32	90	0.00	83	0.03	80	0.03	77	0.03	82	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		39	0.54	37	0.00	36	0.06	40	0.15	54	0.05	54	0.09
Osinska 1989		52	0.49	81	0.00	59	0.05	48	0.05	55	0.05	70	0.05
Pachmann 1927		40	0.53	17	0.01	30	0.06	34	0.18	15	0.51	24	0.30
Paderewski 1930		49	0.50	44	0.00	49	0.05	52	0.05	36	0.15	53	0.09
Perlemuter 1992		29	0.58	71	0.00	22	0.08	21	0.29	14	0.47	16	0.37
Pierdomenico 2008		61	0.46	40	0.00	68	0.03	77	0.03	41	0.14	66	0.06
Poblocka 1999		21	0.59	69	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.15	36	0.17	39	0.16
Rabcewiczowa 1932		60	0.47	23	0.00	52	0.04	57	0.04	25	0.36	44	0.12
Rachmaninoff 1923		71	0.36	67	0.00	57	0.05	45	0.05	52	0.05	71	0.05
Rangell 2001		35	0.56	53	0.00	45	0.05	46	0.05	24	0.28	46	0.12
Richter 1976		33	0.57	28	0.00	28	0.06	30	0.20	14	0.39	26	0.28
Rosen 1989		47	0.51	72	0.00	58	0.05	55	0.05	59	0.04	80	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		75	0.35	78	0.00	77	0.03	83	0.03	43	0.09	73	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		76	0.34	56	0.00	66	0.03	79	0.03	27	0.23	61	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		77	0.32	70	0.00	78	0.03	82	0.03	42	0.13	69	0.06
Rosenthal 1931c		64	0.43	32	0.00	67	0.04	66	0.04	37	0.16	62	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d		72	0.36	87	0.00	79	0.04	64	0.04	44	0.08	68	0.06
Rossi 2007		84	0.21	88	0.00	80	0.04	68	0.04	33	0.18	60	0.08
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.28	79	0.00	85	0.05	53	0.05	60	0.04	76	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		11	0.63	9	0.05	19	0.07	22	0.29	13	0.47	18	0.37
Rubinstein 1966		13	0.62	31	0.00	23	0.09	18	0.31	5	0.61	14	0.43
Schilhawsky 1960		67	0.42	61	0.00	71	0.04	56	0.04	56	0.05	79	0.04
Shebanova 2002		23	0.59	73	0.00	41	0.05	42	0.14	40	0.22	38	0.18
Smith 1975		10	0.64	7	0.06	6	0.10	11	0.43	14	0.43	12	0.43
Sokolov 2002		19	0.60	26	0.00	39	0.06	29	0.20	27	0.35	27	0.26
Sztompka 1959		28	0.58	38	0.00	35	0.06	33	0.18	28	0.33	33	0.24
Tomsic 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1932		53	0.49	34	0.00	46	0.04	60	0.04	31	0.19	56	0.09
Uninsky 1971		36	0.55	60	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.12	35	0.27	37	0.18
Wasowski 1980		63	0.44	10	0.04	33	0.06	44	0.12	34	0.20	40	0.15
Zak 1937		34	0.57	84	0.00	37	0.05	36	0.18	21	0.38	28	0.26
Zak 1951		20	0.60	85	0.00	17	0.08	14	0.38	12	0.49	13	0.43
Random 1		89	-0.02	62	0.00	86	0.01	88	0.01	13	0.38	67	0.06
Random 2		90	-0.06	50	0.00	87	0.01	89	0.01	43	0.10	84	0.03
Random 3		88	-0.01	63	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	58	0.03	89	0.02

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).