Brailowsky 1960

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		55	0.52	27	0.01	76	0.04	66	0.04	64	0.04	62	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		52	0.53	26	0.01	49	0.05	51	0.05	49	0.04	60	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		44	0.56	46	0.00	45	0.04	65	0.04	70	0.03	79	0.03
Bacha 2000		17	0.66	21	0.01	20	0.07	18	0.36	12	0.47	10	0.41
Badura 1965		80	0.33	36	0.00	79	0.04	79	0.04	83	0.02	75	0.03
Barbosa 1983		70	0.43	33	0.00	56	0.04	77	0.04	60	0.04	59	0.04
Biret 1990		23	0.64	66	0.00	44	0.05	43	0.10	52	0.04	48	0.06
Blet 2003		59	0.49	65	0.00	77	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.02	85	0.02
Block 1995		14	0.67	25	0.01	17	0.08	16	0.39	7	0.38	14	0.38
Blumental 1952		81	0.33	13	0.02	55	0.04	72	0.04	70	0.03	77	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		11	0.71	8	0.03	18	0.09	21	0.34	19	0.30	21	0.32
Brailowsky 1960		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Bunin 1987		45	0.56	71	0.00	65	0.05	56	0.05	64	0.04	64	0.04
Bunin 1987b		43	0.56	72	0.00	64	0.05	55	0.05	61	0.04	56	0.04
Chiu 1999		39	0.59	77	0.00	25	0.08	19	0.35	24	0.31	20	0.33
Cohen 1997		48	0.55	4	0.06	8	0.07	17	0.37	4	0.52	8	0.44
Cortot 1951		77	0.37	74	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	76	0.03	81	0.03
Csalog 1996		63	0.48	51	0.00	40	0.05	39	0.12	28	0.28	28	0.18
Czerny 1949		73	0.40	63	0.00	73	0.04	76	0.04	78	0.03	73	0.03
Czerny 1990		49	0.55	55	0.00	72	0.05	53	0.05	78	0.03	65	0.04
Duchoud 2007		68	0.46	87	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	87	0.02	74	0.03
Ezaki 2006		28	0.63	12	0.03	37	0.05	42	0.10	80	0.03	49	0.05
Falvay 1989		2	0.76	2	0.12	3	0.14	1	0.56	14	0.38	6	0.46
Farrell 1958		26	0.64	23	0.01	48	0.07	45	0.07	27	0.20	33	0.12
Ferenczy 1958		67	0.46	16	0.01	78	0.04	64	0.04	65	0.03	72	0.03
Fliere 1977		9	0.72	50	0.00	21	0.07	13	0.39	53	0.05	29	0.14
Fou 1978		6	0.72	22	0.01	7	0.07	6	0.47	15	0.44	7	0.45
Francois 1956		62	0.48	67	0.00	66	0.04	61	0.04	83	0.03	83	0.03
Friedman 1923		90	-0.18	81	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	0.03	90	0.02
Friedman 1923b		89	-0.17	88	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	83	0.03	89	0.02
Friedman 1930		85	0.05	56	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	84	0.02	86	0.02
Garcia 2007		61	0.49	61	0.00	52	0.04	59	0.04	27	0.25	39	0.10
Garcia 2007b		75	0.38	54	0.00	53	0.05	48	0.05	7	0.40	30	0.14
Gierzod 1998		40	0.59	52	0.00	43	0.04	44	0.09	80	0.03	51	0.05
Gornostaeva 1994		19	0.66	41	0.00	35	0.06	35	0.15	44	0.08	37	0.11
Groot 1988		8	0.72	6	0.05	5	0.08	5	0.49	24	0.25	18	0.35
Harasiewicz 1955		47	0.55	49	0.00	23	0.07	25	0.28	51	0.05	34	0.12
Hatto 1993		78	0.36	20	0.01	39	0.05	34	0.16	49	0.04	42	0.08
Hatto 1997		72	0.41	75	0.00	42	0.07	37	0.13	53	0.04	44	0.07
Horowitz 1949		22	0.65	9	0.03	12	0.09	9	0.45	11	0.38	11	0.41
Indjic 1988		76	0.38	84	0.00	41	0.05	36	0.14	49	0.04	43	0.07
Kapell 1951		60	0.49	40	0.00	58	0.04	67	0.04	74	0.03	68	0.03
Kissin 1993		12	0.68	48	0.00	24	0.08	15	0.39	28	0.25	22	0.31
Kushner 1989		18	0.66	85	0.00	31	0.05	32	0.22	54	0.04	40	0.09
Luisada 1991		4	0.74	15	0.02	19	0.08	12	0.40	16	0.38	13	0.39
Lushtak 2004		50	0.54	68	0.00	54	0.04	63	0.04	77	0.03	76	0.03
Malcuzynski 1961		13	0.67	69	0.00	32	0.07	33	0.20	71	0.03	41	0.08
Magaloff 1978		1	0.77	1	0.21	1	0.20	2	0.54	11	0.43	4	0.48
Magin 1975		33	0.61	57	0.00	28	0.10	28	0.28	19	0.26	23	0.27
Michalowski 1933		84	0.19	44	0.00	74	0.04	78	0.04	55	0.05	58	0.04
Milkina 1970		3	0.75	11	0.03	4	0.13	3	0.53	6	0.49	2	0.51
Mohovich 1999		10	0.71	10	0.03	26	0.10	24	0.30	53	0.04	36	0.11
Moravec 1969		53	0.53	59	0.00	50	0.04	68	0.04	56	0.04	52	0.04
Morozova 2008		32	0.61	19	0.01	33	0.06	31	0.23	59	0.04	38	0.10
Neighaus 1950		34	0.60	82	0.00	46	0.04	73	0.04	75	0.03	80	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		69	0.45	31	0.00	51	0.05	54	0.05	20	0.26	35	0.11
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.59	39	0.00	57	0.04	74	0.04	63	0.03	70	0.03
Osinska 1989		35	0.60	79	0.00	61	0.04	60	0.04	45	0.05	54	0.04
Pachmann 1927		41	0.59	38	0.00	22	0.07	30	0.25	18	0.45	19	0.34
Paderewski 1930		58	0.50	89	0.00	71	0.04	62	0.04	62	0.03	69	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		46	0.55	78	0.00	62	0.05	49	0.05	58	0.04	53	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		16	0.66	62	0.00	16	0.08	14	0.39	13	0.34	15	0.36
Poblocka 1999		38	0.59	64	0.00	63	0.06	47	0.06	53	0.04	50	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		74	0.38	53	0.00	81	0.04	80	0.04	75	0.03	67	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		66	0.47	42	0.00	67	0.04	58	0.04	45	0.05	55	0.04
Rangell 2001		15	0.67	32	0.00	15	0.07	11	0.41	14	0.30	17	0.35
Richter 1976		25	0.64	80	0.00	27	0.09	23	0.33	10	0.39	16	0.36
Rosen 1989		21	0.65	29	0.01	30	0.08	26	0.28	30	0.27	24	0.27
Rosenthal 1930		64	0.48	58	0.00	69	0.05	50	0.05	67	0.03	63	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		30	0.62	47	0.00	14	0.08	10	0.41	9	0.46	9	0.43
Rosenthal 1931b		27	0.64	60	0.00	6	0.08	7	0.46	6	0.50	5	0.48
Rosenthal 1931c		57	0.50	70	0.00	60	0.04	71	0.04	66	0.03	82	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		5	0.72	3	0.07	2	0.15	4	0.52	5	0.55	1	0.53
Rossi 2007		79	0.34	7	0.04	34	0.06	40	0.10	27	0.16	31	0.13
Rubinstein 1939		56	0.51	5	0.05	9	0.08	27	0.28	3	0.56	12	0.40
Rubinstein 1952		7	0.72	14	0.02	13	0.09	8	0.46	9	0.54	3	0.50
Rubinstein 1966		42	0.57	30	0.01	38	0.05	41	0.10	33	0.18	32	0.13
Schilhawsky 1960		65	0.47	45	0.00	68	0.06	46	0.06	79	0.03	61	0.04
Shebanova 2002		20	0.66	34	0.00	29	0.07	29	0.26	30	0.25	26	0.25
Smith 1975		29	0.63	24	0.01	36	0.07	38	0.13	72	0.03	46	0.06
Sokolov 2002		54	0.52	43	0.00	70	0.04	57	0.04	79	0.03	66	0.03
Sztompka 1959		83	0.29	73	0.00	83	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02	84	0.02
Tomsic 1995		24	0.64	18	0.01	47	0.05	52	0.05	74	0.03	57	0.04
Uninsky 1932		82	0.30	76	0.00	84	0.02	84	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02
Uninsky 1971		71	0.42	28	0.01	80	0.04	69	0.04	83	0.02	71	0.03
Wasowski 1980		51	0.53	37	0.00	59	0.04	70	0.04	41	0.10	45	0.06
Zak 1937		31	0.61	35	0.00	11	0.09	22	0.34	35	0.20	25	0.26
Zak 1951		36	0.60	17	0.01	10	0.06	20	0.35	43	0.14	27	0.22
Random 1		87	-0.03	90	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	35	0.17	47	0.06
Random 2		88	-0.16	86	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	52	0.03	88	0.02
Random 3		86	0.04	83	0.00	86	0.02	85	0.02	55	0.05	78	0.03

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).