Friedman 1923b

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		40	0.19	27	0.00	20	0.06	20	0.36	67	0.03	32	0.10
Anderszewski 2003		29	0.23	28	0.00	41	0.06	42	0.15	68	0.03	40	0.07
Ashkenazy 1981		20	0.26	29	0.00	40	0.07	35	0.20	86	0.02	46	0.06
Bacha 2000		70	0.01	30	0.00	79	0.03	84	0.03	88	0.02	77	0.02
Badura 1965		38	0.20	31	0.00	22	0.06	25	0.32	63	0.04	28	0.11
Barbosa 1983		53	0.11	32	0.00	57	0.05	62	0.05	76	0.03	51	0.04
Biret 1990		42	0.17	33	0.00	48	0.04	76	0.04	79	0.02	74	0.03
Blet 2003		18	0.27	9	0.00	17	0.06	17	0.41	71	0.03	27	0.11
Block 1995		69	0.01	18	0.00	24	0.06	40	0.16	83	0.02	45	0.06
Blumental 1952		12	0.30	34	0.00	8	0.13	9	0.45	14	0.32	6	0.38
Boshniakovich 1969		59	0.06	35	0.00	60	0.05	65	0.05	87	0.02	72	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		86	-0.17	19	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	89	0.02	78	0.02
Bunin 1987		10	0.30	36	0.00	12	0.07	11	0.43	53	0.05	20	0.15
Bunin 1987b		11	0.30	10	0.00	13	0.08	12	0.43	53	0.05	18	0.15
Chiu 1999		54	0.10	37	0.00	64	0.05	55	0.05	85	0.02	62	0.03
Cohen 1997		88	-0.23	38	0.00	87	0.01	88	0.01	89	0.02	89	0.01
Cortot 1951		14	0.30	39	0.00	10	0.08	13	0.43	36	0.19	11	0.29
Csalog 1996		89	-0.23	40	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	89	0.02	88	0.01
Czerny 1949		28	0.23	41	0.00	9	0.08	8	0.45	34	0.20	9	0.30
Czerny 1990		39	0.19	11	0.00	16	0.10	14	0.43	62	0.04	23	0.13
Duchoud 2007		6	0.34	42	0.00	11	0.06	18	0.41	64	0.04	22	0.13
Ezaki 2006		30	0.23	43	0.00	29	0.06	23	0.33	81	0.03	30	0.10
Falvay 1989		84	-0.14	44	0.00	83	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02	79	0.02
Farrell 1958		26	0.24	45	0.00	44	0.08	41	0.16	69	0.03	39	0.07
Ferenczy 1958		57	0.08	46	0.00	42	0.05	44	0.11	49	0.05	41	0.07
Fliere 1977		49	0.12	2	0.00	61	0.06	54	0.06	86	0.02	60	0.03
Fou 1978		79	-0.04	47	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	89	0.02	80	0.02
Francois 1956		56	0.09	48	0.00	35	0.07	36	0.19	48	0.05	33	0.10
Friedman 1923		1	1.00	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Friedman 1923b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1930		2	0.63	5	0.00	2	0.58	2	0.75	2	0.67	2	0.71
Garcia 2007		33	0.22	6	0.00	46	0.05	56	0.05	67	0.03	53	0.04
Garcia 2007b		22	0.26	20	0.00	36	0.07	31	0.22	19	0.22	14	0.22
Gierzod 1998		31	0.22	49	0.00	38	0.07	38	0.19	63	0.03	37	0.08
Gornostaeva 1994		45	0.16	50	0.00	25	0.06	26	0.30	64	0.03	35	0.09
Groot 1988		68	0.02	51	0.00	52	0.05	58	0.05	83	0.03	55	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		51	0.12	12	0.00	51	0.05	63	0.05	79	0.03	56	0.04
Hatto 1993		17	0.27	52	0.00	53	0.04	74	0.04	79	0.02	76	0.03
Hatto 1997		15	0.30	53	0.00	45	0.06	50	0.06	74	0.03	52	0.04
Horowitz 1949		67	0.03	13	0.00	72	0.06	51	0.06	86	0.02	69	0.03
Indjic 1988		19	0.27	54	0.00	54	0.06	52	0.06	78	0.02	71	0.03
Kapell 1951		41	0.18	55	0.00	37	0.07	28	0.27	44	0.09	16	0.16
Kissin 1993		82	-0.11	21	0.00	77	0.03	81	0.03	89	0.01	84	0.02
Kushner 1989		43	0.17	56	0.00	49	0.04	72	0.04	82	0.02	66	0.03
Luisada 1991		58	0.08	57	0.00	66	0.05	68	0.05	88	0.02	58	0.03
Lushtak 2004		36	0.21	58	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.13	85	0.02	47	0.05
Malcuzynski 1961		27	0.24	59	0.00	26	0.08	22	0.34	76	0.03	31	0.10
Magaloff 1978		61	0.06	60	0.00	65	0.05	69	0.05	86	0.02	63	0.03
Magin 1975		44	0.17	61	0.00	27	0.06	39	0.17	74	0.02	42	0.06
Michalowski 1933		8	0.33	62	0.00	7	0.17	7	0.48	30	0.30	5	0.38
Milkina 1970		83	-0.12	63	0.00	85	0.03	79	0.03	89	0.02	81	0.02
Mohovich 1999		60	0.06	64	0.00	50	0.05	67	0.05	81	0.03	54	0.04
Moravec 1969		66	0.03	65	0.00	58	0.05	66	0.05	88	0.02	57	0.03
Morozova 2008		34	0.21	14	0.00	39	0.06	37	0.19	87	0.02	44	0.06
Neighaus 1950		9	0.31	66	0.00	15	0.09	19	0.40	66	0.04	24	0.13
Niedzielski 1931		65	0.03	67	0.00	59	0.05	57	0.05	81	0.02	65	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.20	68	0.00	47	0.05	70	0.05	85	0.02	70	0.03
Osinska 1989		63	0.05	4	0.00	56	0.05	64	0.05	84	0.02	61	0.03
Pachmann 1927		81	-0.10	22	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	87	0.02	83	0.02
Paderewski 1930		50	0.12	3	0.00	32	0.06	32	0.21	36	0.13	15	0.17
Perlemuter 1992		47	0.14	69	0.00	23	0.05	29	0.25	68	0.03	34	0.09
Pierdomenico 2008		77	-0.03	15	0.00	75	0.04	73	0.04	88	0.02	64	0.03
Poblocka 1999		52	0.11	70	0.00	55	0.05	71	0.05	84	0.03	49	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		35	0.21	71	0.00	18	0.09	10	0.44	38	0.15	12	0.26
Rachmaninoff 1923		5	0.37	72	0.00	6	0.17	6	0.50	32	0.17	10	0.29
Rangell 2001		64	0.05	73	0.00	71	0.05	59	0.05	87	0.02	73	0.03
Richter 1976		85	-0.15	8	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	89	0.01	82	0.02
Rosen 1989		16	0.28	74	0.00	19	0.08	16	0.42	80	0.03	29	0.11
Rosenthal 1930		21	0.26	16	0.00	21	0.06	21	0.35	40	0.15	13	0.23
Rosenthal 1931		48	0.14	75	0.00	63	0.07	45	0.07	49	0.05	43	0.06
Rosenthal 1931b		46	0.16	76	0.00	62	0.07	47	0.07	58	0.04	48	0.05
Rosenthal 1931c		25	0.24	77	0.00	34	0.07	30	0.23	62	0.03	38	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d		62	0.05	78	0.00	67	0.05	61	0.05	83	0.02	75	0.03
Rossi 2007		73	0.00	23	0.00	31	0.05	33	0.21	56	0.03	36	0.08
Rubinstein 1939		87	-0.19	79	0.00	88	0.01	87	0.01	89	0.01	87	0.01
Rubinstein 1952		90	-0.36	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	89	0.02	90	0.01
Rubinstein 1966		78	-0.03	81	0.00	81	0.03	82	0.03	90	0.01	85	0.02
Schilhawsky 1960		13	0.30	17	0.00	30	0.07	24	0.33	57	0.05	21	0.13
Shebanova 2002		80	-0.09	82	0.00	82	0.03	78	0.03	89	0.02	86	0.02
Smith 1975		32	0.22	24	0.00	14	0.09	15	0.42	68	0.03	26	0.11
Sokolov 2002		24	0.25	83	0.00	33	0.06	27	0.28	63	0.04	25	0.11
Sztompka 1959		4	0.40	7	0.00	4	0.28	5	0.52	24	0.36	4	0.43
Tomsic 1995		71	0.01	84	0.00	70	0.06	48	0.06	87	0.02	68	0.03
Uninsky 1932		3	0.41	85	0.00	3	0.30	3	0.58	10	0.45	3	0.51
Uninsky 1971		7	0.34	86	0.00	5	0.13	4	0.53	36	0.21	7	0.33
Wasowski 1980		76	0.00	25	0.00	73	0.06	53	0.06	88	0.02	59	0.03
Zak 1937		72	0.00	87	0.00	76	0.05	60	0.05	85	0.03	50	0.04
Zak 1951		74	0.00	26	0.00	74	0.04	75	0.04	83	0.03	67	0.03
Random 1		55	0.09	88	0.00	68	0.06	49	0.06	8	0.42	17	0.16
Random 2		75	0.00	89	0.00	69	0.07	46	0.07	14	0.32	19	0.15
Random 3		23	0.26	90	0.00	28	0.08	34	0.20	7	0.47	8	0.31

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).