Perlemuter 1992

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		18	0.66	24	0.01	33	0.06	31	0.19	35	0.14	39	0.16
Anderszewski 2003		67	0.47	78	0.00	42	0.04	40	0.11	29	0.22	38	0.16
Ashkenazy 1981		49	0.53	70	0.00	47	0.05	49	0.05	74	0.03	69	0.04
Bacha 2000		75	0.38	11	0.03	77	0.03	70	0.03	51	0.05	63	0.04
Badura 1965		38	0.56	32	0.01	31	0.06	33	0.16	27	0.31	29	0.22
Barbosa 1983		31	0.62	18	0.01	37	0.05	36	0.12	31	0.29	33	0.19
Biret 1990		71	0.44	79	0.00	75	0.03	72	0.03	71	0.03	85	0.03
Blet 2003		7	0.72	12	0.02	14	0.07	10	0.43	15	0.39	12	0.41
Block 1995		22	0.65	2	0.09	4	0.14	13	0.42	2	0.53	5	0.47
Blumental 1952		74	0.40	46	0.00	68	0.03	62	0.03	50	0.04	83	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		35	0.61	64	0.00	38	0.04	39	0.11	25	0.25	37	0.17
Brailowsky 1960		40	0.55	50	0.00	69	0.04	58	0.04	49	0.05	65	0.04
Bunin 1987		12	0.68	34	0.00	19	0.06	9	0.43	15	0.42	11	0.42
Bunin 1987b		13	0.68	31	0.01	20	0.07	11	0.42	15	0.42	9	0.42
Chiu 1999		43	0.54	68	0.00	56	0.05	53	0.05	48	0.05	60	0.05
Cohen 1997		81	0.21	61	0.00	83	0.02	86	0.02	70	0.03	88	0.02
Cortot 1951		57	0.50	85	0.00	64	0.03	71	0.03	48	0.06	71	0.04
Csalog 1996		78	0.29	42	0.00	86	0.03	69	0.03	61	0.03	79	0.03
Czerny 1949		36	0.60	89	0.00	43	0.04	42	0.10	50	0.06	54	0.08
Czerny 1990		10	0.70	35	0.00	13	0.08	12	0.42	31	0.23	19	0.31
Duchoud 2007		46	0.53	87	0.00	44	0.05	43	0.09	43	0.10	49	0.09
Ezaki 2006		8	0.71	43	0.00	21	0.07	21	0.34	36	0.13	31	0.21
Falvay 1989		5	0.73	27	0.01	15	0.07	22	0.31	23	0.28	21	0.29
Farrell 1958		58	0.50	20	0.01	39	0.04	38	0.12	5	0.43	26	0.23
Ferenczy 1958		41	0.54	71	0.00	62	0.03	64	0.03	32	0.26	48	0.09
Fliere 1977		16	0.67	13	0.02	22	0.08	20	0.34	28	0.20	22	0.26
Fou 1978		30	0.63	28	0.01	26	0.08	29	0.21	32	0.31	23	0.26
Francois 1956		28	0.63	65	0.00	32	0.07	30	0.20	38	0.13	41	0.16
Friedman 1923		87	0.13	52	0.00	81	0.03	74	0.03	31	0.24	55	0.08
Friedman 1923b		86	0.14	60	0.00	80	0.03	68	0.03	29	0.25	50	0.09
Friedman 1930		79	0.25	59	0.00	76	0.04	60	0.04	41	0.09	57	0.06
Garcia 2007		69	0.46	76	0.00	53	0.05	50	0.05	5	0.50	40	0.16
Garcia 2007b		83	0.17	62	0.00	79	0.03	76	0.03	31	0.15	56	0.07
Gierzod 1998		61	0.49	73	0.00	65	0.03	73	0.03	66	0.03	81	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		33	0.62	19	0.01	29	0.06	27	0.23	30	0.21	30	0.22
Groot 1988		3	0.73	23	0.01	5	0.14	2	0.56	10	0.46	2	0.51
Harasiewicz 1955		4	0.73	5	0.05	3	0.18	4	0.54	10	0.42	4	0.48
Hatto 1993		84	0.17	51	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	82	0.02	89	0.02
Hatto 1997		80	0.23	82	0.00	82	0.03	79	0.03	77	0.03	80	0.03
Horowitz 1949		53	0.52	37	0.00	48	0.04	54	0.04	29	0.21	47	0.09
Indjic 1988		82	0.19	33	0.00	85	0.03	67	0.03	75	0.02	86	0.02
Kapell 1951		51	0.52	90	0.00	60	0.03	66	0.03	57	0.04	76	0.03
Kissin 1993		20	0.65	14	0.02	17	0.06	28	0.22	36	0.21	32	0.21
Kushner 1989		25	0.64	8	0.03	30	0.07	26	0.24	43	0.14	34	0.18
Luisada 1991		48	0.53	30	0.01	63	0.03	78	0.03	70	0.03	73	0.03
Lushtak 2004		15	0.67	56	0.00	10	0.08	14	0.40	23	0.30	15	0.35
Malcuzynski 1961		24	0.64	63	0.00	23	0.07	23	0.30	30	0.21	25	0.25
Magaloff 1978		34	0.61	47	0.00	28	0.06	24	0.27	32	0.24	24	0.25
Magin 1975		44	0.54	54	0.00	46	0.05	45	0.05	35	0.15	46	0.09
Michalowski 1933		77	0.34	15	0.02	11	0.08	34	0.15	38	0.21	35	0.18
Milkina 1970		39	0.56	40	0.00	50	0.05	51	0.05	49	0.05	62	0.05
Mohovich 1999		1	0.78	1	0.21	1	0.20	1	0.64	5	0.53	1	0.58
Moravec 1969		65	0.47	55	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	73	0.03	72	0.03
Morozova 2008		19	0.66	9	0.03	25	0.08	17	0.34	11	0.27	20	0.30
Neighaus 1950		21	0.65	3	0.08	2	0.14	3	0.55	15	0.46	3	0.50
Niedzielski 1931		76	0.36	44	0.00	73	0.03	85	0.03	23	0.24	53	0.08
Ohlsson 1999		70	0.45	41	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	71	0.03	78	0.03
Osinska 1989		47	0.53	39	0.00	66	0.03	82	0.03	62	0.04	74	0.03
Pachmann 1927		63	0.49	57	0.00	57	0.04	61	0.04	29	0.26	44	0.10
Paderewski 1930		59	0.50	66	0.00	67	0.03	80	0.03	58	0.03	77	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Pierdomenico 2008		37	0.56	86	0.00	59	0.04	56	0.04	48	0.04	67	0.04
Poblocka 1999		42	0.54	25	0.01	51	0.05	52	0.05	75	0.03	66	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		56	0.51	69	0.00	61	0.04	57	0.04	46	0.06	61	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923		26	0.63	10	0.03	8	0.12	8	0.43	6	0.42	8	0.42
Rangell 2001		73	0.43	74	0.00	74	0.03	83	0.03	53	0.05	70	0.04
Richter 1976		11	0.70	4	0.08	7	0.13	16	0.40	3	0.48	6	0.44
Rosen 1989		55	0.51	48	0.00	58	0.03	65	0.03	65	0.03	82	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		52	0.52	45	0.00	45	0.04	59	0.04	26	0.33	43	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		60	0.49	83	0.00	54	0.05	47	0.05	32	0.21	45	0.10
Rosenthal 1931b		72	0.43	88	0.00	55	0.05	46	0.05	30	0.18	51	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		45	0.53	72	0.00	41	0.04	41	0.10	20	0.34	36	0.18
Rosenthal 1931d		68	0.46	80	0.00	72	0.03	77	0.03	37	0.13	59	0.06
Rossi 2007		50	0.53	53	0.00	49	0.04	55	0.04	8	0.30	42	0.11
Rubinstein 1939		85	0.15	38	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	69	0.04	75	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		54	0.51	7	0.03	36	0.05	37	0.12	47	0.07	52	0.09
Rubinstein 1966		66	0.47	67	0.00	70	0.03	63	0.03	45	0.06	68	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		29	0.63	84	0.00	27	0.06	18	0.34	20	0.29	18	0.31
Shebanova 2002		62	0.49	26	0.01	40	0.04	44	0.08	67	0.04	58	0.06
Smith 1975		2	0.74	22	0.01	9	0.17	7	0.45	26	0.25	16	0.34
Sokolov 2002		17	0.66	16	0.02	12	0.08	5	0.46	18	0.40	7	0.43
Sztompka 1959		32	0.62	36	0.00	16	0.06	25	0.27	16	0.40	17	0.33
Tomsic 1995		6	0.73	6	0.05	6	0.13	6	0.46	14	0.39	10	0.42
Uninsky 1932		27	0.63	49	0.00	35	0.06	35	0.14	23	0.35	28	0.22
Uninsky 1971		14	0.68	29	0.01	24	0.08	19	0.34	8	0.47	14	0.40
Wasowski 1980		64	0.48	58	0.00	52	0.05	48	0.05	52	0.04	64	0.04
Zak 1937		23	0.64	21	0.01	34	0.06	32	0.18	28	0.26	27	0.22
Zak 1951		9	0.70	17	0.01	18	0.06	15	0.40	17	0.40	13	0.40
Random 1		88	-0.03	75	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	47	0.05	84	0.03
Random 2		90	-0.29	81	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	90	0.01	90	0.01
Random 3		89	-0.10	77	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	77	0.02	87	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).