Gornostaeva 1994

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		14	0.74	10	0.03	14	0.09	13	0.37	8	0.40	14	0.38
Anderszewski 2003		58	0.55	22	0.01	56	0.03	63	0.03	61	0.03	76	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		62	0.54	56	0.00	58	0.03	62	0.03	51	0.04	81	0.03
Bacha 2000		65	0.53	50	0.00	75	0.02	84	0.02	50	0.05	72	0.03
Badura 1965		61	0.54	62	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.10	23	0.32	36	0.18
Barbosa 1983		68	0.52	51	0.00	49	0.05	46	0.05	49	0.05	60	0.05
Biret 1990		20	0.71	11	0.02	26	0.05	33	0.19	44	0.11	41	0.14
Blet 2003		32	0.64	20	0.01	41	0.06	41	0.13	38	0.14	42	0.13
Block 1995		23	0.69	23	0.01	21	0.06	26	0.25	5	0.40	22	0.32
Blumental 1952		80	0.27	42	0.00	81	0.03	72	0.03	69	0.03	80	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		16	0.73	5	0.08	8	0.14	10	0.39	5	0.53	7	0.45
Brailowsky 1960		31	0.66	58	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.08	35	0.15	44	0.11
Bunin 1987		43	0.61	89	0.00	54	0.06	45	0.06	51	0.05	61	0.05
Bunin 1987b		42	0.61	85	0.00	53	0.03	68	0.03	51	0.05	64	0.04
Chiu 1999		73	0.47	66	0.00	63	0.04	61	0.04	46	0.06	57	0.05
Cohen 1997		82	0.27	16	0.02	74	0.03	75	0.03	59	0.04	82	0.03
Cortot 1951		63	0.54	61	0.00	71	0.04	55	0.04	61	0.04	71	0.04
Csalog 1996		75	0.43	59	0.00	87	0.02	85	0.02	70	0.03	86	0.02
Czerny 1949		15	0.73	4	0.09	5	0.12	11	0.39	20	0.37	13	0.38
Czerny 1990		11	0.77	53	0.00	15	0.08	16	0.36	24	0.27	24	0.31
Duchoud 2007		36	0.63	70	0.00	45	0.04	54	0.04	46	0.05	69	0.04
Ezaki 2006		6	0.80	19	0.01	11	0.12	4	0.51	13	0.40	6	0.45
Falvay 1989		28	0.68	32	0.00	32	0.05	36	0.18	33	0.16	37	0.17
Farrell 1958		30	0.66	21	0.01	24	0.06	32	0.19	20	0.23	32	0.21
Ferenczy 1958		71	0.49	33	0.00	83	0.02	81	0.02	68	0.03	87	0.02
Fliere 1977		3	0.83	7	0.04	7	0.11	7	0.46	11	0.40	8	0.43
Fou 1978		40	0.62	25	0.00	16	0.08	17	0.36	18	0.39	16	0.37
Francois 1956		12	0.77	3	0.10	2	0.15	6	0.46	9	0.46	5	0.46
Friedman 1923		87	0.16	76	0.00	79	0.02	82	0.02	25	0.33	48	0.08
Friedman 1923b		86	0.16	81	0.00	80	0.03	64	0.03	26	0.30	45	0.09
Friedman 1930		76	0.41	43	0.00	46	0.04	51	0.04	16	0.39	43	0.12
Garcia 2007		77	0.36	82	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	75	0.03	79	0.03
Garcia 2007b		83	0.26	86	0.00	77	0.02	86	0.02	25	0.19	55	0.06
Gierzod 1998		21	0.70	15	0.02	40	0.07	40	0.16	52	0.04	47	0.08
Gornostaeva 1994		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Groot 1988		8	0.78	28	0.00	12	0.13	14	0.36	12	0.42	12	0.39
Harasiewicz 1955		56	0.56	45	0.00	19	0.06	23	0.28	29	0.24	28	0.26
Hatto 1993		85	0.21	77	0.00	84	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.02	90	0.02
Hatto 1997		79	0.29	67	0.00	82	0.03	79	0.03	56	0.03	77	0.03
Horowitz 1949		57	0.55	38	0.00	70	0.05	47	0.05	45	0.06	59	0.05
Indjic 1988		84	0.22	78	0.00	85	0.03	74	0.03	81	0.02	85	0.02
Kapell 1951		47	0.60	71	0.00	57	0.03	71	0.03	76	0.03	74	0.03
Kissin 1993		27	0.68	29	0.00	18	0.07	20	0.31	18	0.38	19	0.34
Kushner 1989		2	0.84	31	0.00	9	0.10	9	0.39	8	0.43	10	0.41
Luisada 1991		34	0.64	44	0.00	52	0.05	48	0.05	52	0.05	56	0.05
Lushtak 2004		69	0.51	48	0.00	55	0.04	58	0.04	61	0.04	70	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		1	0.84	1	0.19	1	0.19	1	0.59	5	0.56	2	0.57
Magaloff 1978		5	0.80	6	0.05	6	0.10	8	0.44	16	0.41	9	0.42
Magin 1975		41	0.62	73	0.00	37	0.06	39	0.16	29	0.21	35	0.18
Michalowski 1933		78	0.36	88	0.00	48	0.04	59	0.04	65	0.04	65	0.04
Milkina 1970		29	0.67	49	0.00	36	0.05	34	0.19	33	0.21	33	0.20
Mohovich 1999		9	0.78	17	0.01	13	0.09	12	0.39	16	0.37	15	0.38
Moravec 1969		52	0.57	39	0.00	68	0.04	60	0.04	63	0.04	62	0.04
Morozova 2008		44	0.61	46	0.00	34	0.08	28	0.23	38	0.12	38	0.17
Neighaus 1950		10	0.77	2	0.11	3	0.13	3	0.52	5	0.54	3	0.53
Niedzielski 1931		67	0.53	65	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	76	0.02	84	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		33	0.64	12	0.02	43	0.04	43	0.09	61	0.04	54	0.06
Osinska 1989		7	0.78	14	0.02	20	0.06	18	0.32	12	0.38	18	0.35
Pachmann 1927		74	0.44	83	0.00	60	0.03	78	0.03	38	0.14	53	0.06
Paderewski 1930		45	0.60	41	0.00	59	0.04	56	0.04	44	0.08	52	0.06
Perlemuter 1992		39	0.62	34	0.00	31	0.05	30	0.21	27	0.23	31	0.22
Pierdomenico 2008		19	0.71	72	0.00	27	0.06	19	0.31	18	0.31	23	0.31
Poblocka 1999		37	0.62	35	0.00	66	0.03	70	0.03	62	0.04	73	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		17	0.72	37	0.00	29	0.05	29	0.21	20	0.36	26	0.27
Rachmaninoff 1923		51	0.57	74	0.00	35	0.05	37	0.17	29	0.20	34	0.18
Rangell 2001		25	0.69	55	0.00	23	0.05	22	0.29	24	0.23	27	0.26
Richter 1976		66	0.53	54	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	70	0.03	75	0.03
Rosen 1989		4	0.82	8	0.03	4	0.18	2	0.55	2	0.67	1	0.61
Rosenthal 1930		26	0.69	24	0.01	28	0.05	27	0.23	10	0.48	20	0.33
Rosenthal 1931		38	0.62	87	0.00	25	0.06	21	0.29	10	0.45	17	0.36
Rosenthal 1931b		49	0.59	52	0.00	30	0.05	25	0.26	12	0.42	21	0.33
Rosenthal 1931c		18	0.71	63	0.00	17	0.07	15	0.36	7	0.58	4	0.46
Rosenthal 1931d		35	0.64	40	0.00	39	0.06	38	0.17	13	0.36	30	0.25
Rossi 2007		70	0.50	57	0.00	33	0.06	35	0.18	4	0.36	29	0.25
Rubinstein 1939		81	0.27	9	0.03	73	0.02	87	0.02	38	0.18	51	0.06
Rubinstein 1952		53	0.56	18	0.01	69	0.04	57	0.04	38	0.13	50	0.07
Rubinstein 1966		46	0.60	30	0.00	50	0.04	50	0.04	12	0.46	40	0.14
Schilhawsky 1960		50	0.57	79	0.00	64	0.04	52	0.04	65	0.04	67	0.04
Shebanova 2002		55	0.56	60	0.00	67	0.03	65	0.03	58	0.05	68	0.04
Smith 1975		13	0.77	13	0.02	10	0.11	5	0.50	11	0.31	11	0.39
Sokolov 2002		22	0.69	26	0.00	38	0.06	31	0.19	43	0.12	39	0.15
Sztompka 1959		48	0.59	47	0.00	47	0.05	49	0.05	43	0.13	46	0.08
Tomsic 1995		24	0.69	27	0.00	22	0.06	24	0.27	23	0.31	25	0.29
Uninsky 1932		72	0.48	84	0.00	72	0.03	69	0.03	67	0.04	78	0.03
Uninsky 1971		54	0.56	36	0.00	65	0.03	67	0.03	51	0.05	66	0.04
Wasowski 1980		64	0.53	64	0.00	76	0.02	80	0.02	75	0.03	83	0.02
Zak 1937		60	0.55	68	0.00	62	0.03	66	0.03	54	0.05	63	0.04
Zak 1951		59	0.55	75	0.00	51	0.04	53	0.04	47	0.06	58	0.05
Random 1		89	-0.04	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	51	0.04	89	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.10	80	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	64	0.03	88	0.02
Random 3		88	0.09	69	0.00	88	0.02	83	0.02	23	0.24	49	0.07

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).