Morozova 2008

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	0.63	11	0.03	6	0.09	10	0.29	20	0.30	11	0.29
Anderszewski 2003		45	0.54	75	0.00	63	0.04	57	0.04	36	0.15	61	0.08
Ashkenazy 1981		30	0.59	14	0.02	28	0.05	28	0.17	44	0.10	41	0.13
Bacha 2000		82	0.29	61	0.00	73	0.03	77	0.03	40	0.11	67	0.06
Badura 1965		27	0.60	10	0.03	35	0.04	31	0.15	10	0.47	13	0.27
Barbosa 1983		46	0.54	63	0.00	36	0.04	40	0.11	33	0.28	34	0.18
Biret 1990		33	0.58	82	0.00	21	0.06	22	0.18	25	0.25	24	0.21
Blet 2003		9	0.66	64	0.00	32	0.05	15	0.24	24	0.29	16	0.26
Block 1995		73	0.41	70	0.00	54	0.04	56	0.04	48	0.04	78	0.04
Blumental 1952		36	0.57	7	0.04	17	0.07	32	0.15	9	0.35	21	0.23
Boshniakovich 1969		11	0.65	20	0.01	31	0.06	25	0.17	14	0.33	19	0.24
Brailowsky 1960		22	0.61	22	0.01	46	0.04	59	0.04	31	0.23	50	0.10
Bunin 1987		17	0.62	72	0.00	9	0.07	21	0.20	30	0.27	22	0.23
Bunin 1987b		16	0.63	52	0.00	8	0.07	18	0.20	29	0.27	20	0.23
Chiu 1999		21	0.61	5	0.05	18	0.09	13	0.26	12	0.47	6	0.35
Cohen 1997		87	0.14	73	0.00	85	0.02	80	0.02	67	0.03	90	0.02
Cortot 1951		40	0.57	25	0.01	50	0.04	52	0.04	26	0.31	47	0.11
Csalog 1996		86	0.18	71	0.00	83	0.02	83	0.02	55	0.06	83	0.03
Czerny 1949		13	0.63	8	0.04	7	0.10	8	0.31	26	0.31	8	0.31
Czerny 1990		1	0.72	4	0.06	4	0.10	4	0.42	11	0.39	4	0.40
Duchoud 2007		31	0.59	77	0.00	27	0.05	30	0.15	28	0.29	23	0.21
Ezaki 2006		2	0.72	1	0.13	1	0.12	5	0.38	21	0.30	7	0.34
Falvay 1989		18	0.62	24	0.01	26	0.07	19	0.20	32	0.16	33	0.18
Farrell 1958		53	0.53	78	0.00	64	0.04	64	0.04	10	0.29	46	0.11
Ferenczy 1958		67	0.46	67	0.00	77	0.03	73	0.03	48	0.05	77	0.04
Fliere 1977		4	0.71	18	0.02	5	0.12	3	0.44	13	0.38	3	0.41
Fou 1978		23	0.61	26	0.01	30	0.05	27	0.17	20	0.38	17	0.25
Francois 1956		59	0.51	30	0.01	24	0.05	34	0.14	36	0.13	42	0.13
Friedman 1923		84	0.22	68	0.00	87	0.03	76	0.03	34	0.22	63	0.08
Friedman 1923b		85	0.21	65	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	37	0.19	72	0.06
Friedman 1930		77	0.39	53	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	40	0.11	70	0.06
Garcia 2007		72	0.41	79	0.00	76	0.03	69	0.03	21	0.30	56	0.09
Garcia 2007b		78	0.39	85	0.00	75	0.04	68	0.04	10	0.29	49	0.11
Gierzod 1998		63	0.48	32	0.01	56	0.06	45	0.06	55	0.04	75	0.05
Gornostaeva 1994		24	0.61	42	0.00	37	0.06	38	0.12	28	0.23	36	0.17
Groot 1988		42	0.56	35	0.00	25	0.06	24	0.18	31	0.19	35	0.18
Harasiewicz 1955		37	0.57	60	0.00	42	0.04	43	0.10	43	0.10	54	0.10
Hatto 1993		69	0.45	21	0.01	39	0.04	36	0.13	21	0.30	30	0.20
Hatto 1997		62	0.49	66	0.00	38	0.04	35	0.13	23	0.31	29	0.20
Horowitz 1949		49	0.53	46	0.00	59	0.05	49	0.05	25	0.28	44	0.12
Indjic 1988		68	0.45	50	0.00	40	0.05	37	0.12	22	0.34	28	0.20
Kapell 1951		64	0.48	39	0.00	65	0.04	65	0.04	52	0.05	76	0.04
Kissin 1993		28	0.60	56	0.00	53	0.04	58	0.04	46	0.07	74	0.05
Kushner 1989		7	0.69	2	0.11	2	0.11	2	0.47	6	0.47	2	0.47
Luisada 1991		3	0.71	9	0.03	11	0.07	14	0.26	18	0.34	9	0.30
Lushtak 2004		12	0.65	38	0.00	12	0.09	12	0.26	39	0.14	32	0.19
Malcuzynski 1961		26	0.60	57	0.00	44	0.05	41	0.11	47	0.06	59	0.08
Magaloff 1978		48	0.54	6	0.04	29	0.05	39	0.11	41	0.14	43	0.12
Magin 1975		20	0.62	59	0.00	34	0.04	33	0.15	18	0.26	26	0.20
Michalowski 1933		70	0.44	31	0.01	52	0.05	51	0.05	41	0.14	60	0.08
Milkina 1970		55	0.52	12	0.03	16	0.08	16	0.22	24	0.26	18	0.24
Mohovich 1999		35	0.58	83	0.00	61	0.04	53	0.04	40	0.10	71	0.06
Moravec 1969		65	0.47	13	0.02	14	0.08	20	0.20	22	0.33	14	0.26
Morozova 2008		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Neighaus 1950		25	0.60	27	0.01	20	0.05	9	0.31	32	0.26	12	0.28
Niedzielski 1931		83	0.26	48	0.00	80	0.02	86	0.02	32	0.17	69	0.06
Ohlsson 1999		38	0.57	36	0.00	58	0.05	50	0.05	50	0.06	73	0.05
Osinska 1989		19	0.62	40	0.00	15	0.09	29	0.16	25	0.26	25	0.20
Pachmann 1927		81	0.31	80	0.00	82	0.02	85	0.02	52	0.05	81	0.03
Paderewski 1930		74	0.41	89	0.00	84	0.02	81	0.02	68	0.03	88	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		10	0.66	15	0.02	23	0.05	11	0.27	17	0.34	10	0.30
Pierdomenico 2008		34	0.58	86	0.00	60	0.04	62	0.04	44	0.09	68	0.06
Poblocka 1999		56	0.52	43	0.00	66	0.03	71	0.03	56	0.04	79	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		41	0.56	87	0.00	49	0.04	61	0.04	33	0.17	58	0.08
Rachmaninoff 1923		6	0.70	3	0.09	3	0.09	1	0.47	3	0.53	1	0.50
Rangell 2001		80	0.37	74	0.00	78	0.03	74	0.03	62	0.04	86	0.03
Richter 1976		57	0.52	76	0.00	68	0.04	66	0.04	72	0.03	80	0.03
Rosen 1989		58	0.51	54	0.00	48	0.04	63	0.04	43	0.13	65	0.07
Rosenthal 1930		50	0.53	44	0.00	47	0.04	67	0.04	21	0.38	45	0.12
Rosenthal 1931		66	0.46	58	0.00	69	0.03	79	0.03	23	0.34	52	0.10
Rosenthal 1931b		71	0.42	69	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	24	0.28	57	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		61	0.49	37	0.00	62	0.04	54	0.04	25	0.28	48	0.11
Rosenthal 1931d		79	0.38	47	0.00	74	0.04	60	0.04	38	0.11	66	0.07
Rossi 2007		51	0.53	90	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.10	3	0.38	31	0.19
Rubinstein 1939		75	0.40	34	0.00	79	0.02	82	0.02	20	0.37	55	0.09
Rubinstein 1952		76	0.40	41	0.00	81	0.02	84	0.02	64	0.04	87	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		47	0.54	45	0.00	57	0.05	48	0.05	22	0.42	40	0.14
Schilhawsky 1960		54	0.53	51	0.00	41	0.04	44	0.07	44	0.10	62	0.08
Shebanova 2002		52	0.53	28	0.01	55	0.05	47	0.05	32	0.21	53	0.10
Smith 1975		5	0.70	23	0.01	10	0.07	7	0.35	32	0.20	15	0.26
Sokolov 2002		8	0.68	19	0.01	13	0.09	6	0.37	23	0.36	5	0.36
Sztompka 1959		29	0.60	33	0.00	51	0.04	55	0.04	34	0.24	51	0.10
Tomsic 1995		32	0.59	16	0.02	33	0.04	23	0.18	35	0.15	38	0.16
Uninsky 1932		44	0.55	88	0.00	67	0.03	70	0.03	37	0.17	64	0.07
Uninsky 1971		60	0.50	62	0.00	72	0.03	72	0.03	62	0.04	82	0.03
Wasowski 1980		15	0.63	49	0.00	45	0.06	46	0.06	7	0.35	39	0.14
Zak 1937		43	0.55	29	0.01	22	0.05	26	0.17	39	0.15	37	0.16
Zak 1951		39	0.57	17	0.02	19	0.05	17	0.21	36	0.19	27	0.20
Random 1		89	-0.06	81	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	60	0.04	89	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.16	84	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	44	0.10	84	0.03
Random 3		88	0.01	55	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	50	0.05	85	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).