Shebanova 2002

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		32	0.63	70	0.00	41	0.04	41	0.11	49	0.05	50	0.07
Anderszewski 2003		76	0.36	79	0.00	67	0.03	70	0.03	80	0.02	86	0.02
Ashkenazy 1981		5	0.73	13	0.01	10	0.12	4	0.54	20	0.35	12	0.43
Bacha 2000		12	0.69	59	0.00	20	0.11	15	0.47	5	0.52	8	0.49
Badura 1965		55	0.49	75	0.00	46	0.06	50	0.06	41	0.13	40	0.09
Barbosa 1983		44	0.55	21	0.01	33	0.11	29	0.26	28	0.32	25	0.29
Biret 1990		16	0.69	53	0.00	18	0.12	21	0.42	21	0.27	21	0.34
Blet 2003		38	0.59	22	0.01	52	0.05	56	0.05	50	0.05	59	0.05
Block 1995		52	0.52	47	0.00	62	0.03	71	0.03	37	0.14	56	0.06
Blumental 1952		59	0.47	42	0.00	50	0.07	47	0.07	31	0.16	35	0.11
Boshniakovich 1969		27	0.64	33	0.00	47	0.06	49	0.06	35	0.18	38	0.10
Brailowsky 1960		23	0.66	76	0.00	31	0.06	30	0.25	29	0.26	27	0.25
Bunin 1987		74	0.36	54	0.00	81	0.03	73	0.03	83	0.02	87	0.02
Bunin 1987b		73	0.36	37	0.00	80	0.03	83	0.03	83	0.03	74	0.03
Chiu 1999		19	0.68	7	0.03	5	0.17	6	0.52	3	0.59	3	0.55
Cohen 1997		41	0.58	27	0.00	27	0.08	27	0.31	7	0.46	17	0.38
Cortot 1951		43	0.55	80	0.00	61	0.04	61	0.04	52	0.06	62	0.05
Csalog 1996		11	0.70	3	0.09	3	0.11	9	0.50	2	0.58	4	0.54
Czerny 1949		61	0.47	89	0.00	56	0.06	51	0.06	65	0.03	70	0.04
Czerny 1990		29	0.63	60	0.00	42	0.06	36	0.17	63	0.04	46	0.08
Duchoud 2007		40	0.58	12	0.02	34	0.11	28	0.28	40	0.13	31	0.19
Ezaki 2006		33	0.63	48	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.10	69	0.03	57	0.05
Falvay 1989		4	0.75	14	0.01	11	0.11	7	0.51	16	0.34	13	0.42
Farrell 1958		46	0.54	84	0.00	73	0.05	59	0.05	80	0.03	63	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		66	0.45	85	0.00	72	0.04	68	0.04	61	0.04	69	0.04
Fliere 1977		6	0.73	11	0.02	15	0.11	8	0.50	31	0.18	24	0.30
Fou 1978		17	0.69	35	0.00	12	0.10	13	0.48	21	0.36	14	0.42
Francois 1956		48	0.53	43	0.00	39	0.06	33	0.18	63	0.04	48	0.08
Friedman 1923		90	-0.10	62	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	83	0.03	90	0.02
Friedman 1923b		89	-0.09	56	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	78	0.03	88	0.02
Friedman 1930		86	0.08	51	0.00	86	0.03	80	0.03	82	0.03	77	0.03
Garcia 2007		78	0.34	72	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	56	0.04	78	0.03
Garcia 2007b		85	0.15	66	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	70	0.03	83	0.03
Gierzod 1998		13	0.69	81	0.00	16	0.09	20	0.42	32	0.19	26	0.28
Gornostaeva 1994		42	0.56	63	0.00	55	0.05	58	0.05	65	0.03	71	0.04
Groot 1988		28	0.64	23	0.01	49	0.08	46	0.08	43	0.10	43	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		75	0.36	52	0.00	60	0.04	62	0.04	80	0.03	81	0.03
Hatto 1993		72	0.39	31	0.00	22	0.16	24	0.32	35	0.15	30	0.22
Hatto 1997		70	0.40	19	0.01	32	0.09	31	0.24	51	0.04	37	0.10
Horowitz 1949		53	0.52	16	0.01	51	0.05	57	0.05	55	0.04	65	0.04
Indjic 1988		67	0.41	64	0.00	21	0.11	25	0.32	32	0.16	29	0.23
Kapell 1951		47	0.54	77	0.00	66	0.05	54	0.05	67	0.03	64	0.04
Kissin 1993		1	0.81	1	0.36	1	0.36	1	0.67	2	0.70	1	0.68
Kushner 1989		8	0.72	10	0.02	13	0.10	3	0.56	10	0.40	9	0.47
Luisada 1991		34	0.62	4	0.05	6	0.13	22	0.38	14	0.39	15	0.38
Lushtak 2004		36	0.60	32	0.00	37	0.04	37	0.15	51	0.05	41	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		24	0.66	30	0.00	48	0.09	45	0.09	67	0.04	54	0.06
Magaloff 1978		25	0.64	39	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.11	73	0.03	53	0.06
Magin 1975		58	0.48	25	0.00	36	0.04	39	0.13	52	0.05	45	0.08
Michalowski 1933		79	0.32	57	0.00	65	0.05	60	0.05	63	0.04	66	0.04
Milkina 1970		2	0.78	8	0.03	2	0.25	2	0.58	4	0.59	2	0.58
Mohovich 1999		35	0.61	18	0.01	57	0.06	48	0.06	62	0.04	61	0.05
Moravec 1969		15	0.69	9	0.03	8	0.13	11	0.49	4	0.54	7	0.51
Morozova 2008		49	0.53	24	0.00	30	0.06	32	0.21	47	0.05	36	0.10
Neighaus 1950		30	0.63	73	0.00	38	0.04	35	0.17	57	0.04	47	0.08
Niedzielski 1931		65	0.45	38	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	38	0.12	44	0.08
Ohlsson 1999		7	0.72	2	0.09	4	0.13	5	0.53	7	0.51	5	0.52
Osinska 1989		9	0.71	68	0.00	14	0.08	16	0.46	20	0.31	16	0.38
Pachmann 1927		50	0.53	74	0.00	54	0.06	52	0.06	35	0.22	34	0.11
Paderewski 1930		37	0.60	5	0.05	28	0.08	40	0.12	29	0.17	33	0.14
Perlemuter 1992		56	0.49	49	0.00	64	0.04	67	0.04	44	0.08	52	0.06
Pierdomenico 2008		26	0.64	41	0.00	19	0.10	17	0.44	6	0.43	10	0.43
Poblocka 1999		10	0.71	6	0.04	23	0.11	19	0.43	25	0.28	20	0.35
Rabcewiczowa 1932		60	0.47	82	0.00	71	0.04	64	0.04	64	0.03	73	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		82	0.26	61	0.00	76	0.02	86	0.02	66	0.03	85	0.02
Rangell 2001		20	0.67	17	0.01	24	0.13	14	0.47	18	0.28	19	0.36
Richter 1976		54	0.50	46	0.00	58	0.04	65	0.04	39	0.09	55	0.06
Rosen 1989		14	0.69	45	0.00	26	0.08	23	0.34	28	0.30	22	0.32
Rosenthal 1930		69	0.41	71	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		81	0.30	44	0.00	84	0.03	76	0.03	71	0.03	76	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		80	0.32	55	0.00	83	0.03	78	0.03	79	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		64	0.45	58	0.00	74	0.03	77	0.03	70	0.03	82	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		68	0.41	65	0.00	75	0.03	75	0.03	60	0.04	80	0.03
Rossi 2007		83	0.20	90	0.00	79	0.02	84	0.02	58	0.03	84	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		77	0.34	86	0.00	40	0.04	38	0.15	26	0.34	28	0.23
Rubinstein 1952		3	0.76	36	0.00	7	0.12	10	0.49	7	0.55	6	0.52
Rubinstein 1966		22	0.66	67	0.00	25	0.11	26	0.31	18	0.43	18	0.37
Schilhawsky 1960		63	0.45	50	0.00	63	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.04	68	0.04
Shebanova 2002		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Smith 1975		39	0.59	83	0.00	45	0.06	53	0.06	60	0.04	58	0.05
Sokolov 2002		51	0.53	40	0.00	59	0.04	66	0.04	68	0.03	72	0.03
Sztompka 1959		57	0.49	34	0.00	69	0.03	72	0.03	65	0.04	75	0.03
Tomsic 1995		18	0.68	26	0.00	29	0.06	34	0.18	36	0.14	32	0.16
Uninsky 1932		71	0.40	28	0.00	70	0.04	63	0.04	46	0.06	60	0.05
Uninsky 1971		62	0.46	78	0.00	68	0.03	74	0.03	55	0.05	67	0.04
Wasowski 1980		45	0.54	15	0.01	35	0.05	43	0.11	44	0.08	39	0.09
Zak 1937		21	0.67	29	0.00	9	0.11	12	0.48	14	0.38	11	0.43
Zak 1951		31	0.63	20	0.01	17	0.11	18	0.43	32	0.23	23	0.31
Random 1		87	0.04	87	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	5	0.43	42	0.09
Random 2		88	-0.05	88	0.00	88	0.02	85	0.02	24	0.25	49	0.07
Random 3		84	0.18	69	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	22	0.27	51	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).