Tomsic 1995

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		9	0.77	19	0.01	16	0.10	11	0.48	9	0.40	11	0.44
Anderszewski 2003		69	0.49	27	0.01	60	0.04	56	0.04	43	0.10	61	0.06
Ashkenazy 1981		33	0.65	67	0.00	37	0.05	40	0.11	48	0.05	58	0.07
Bacha 2000		46	0.62	49	0.00	63	0.04	65	0.04	22	0.31	39	0.11
Badura 1965		60	0.57	8	0.04	18	0.09	21	0.33	6	0.54	15	0.42
Barbosa 1983		52	0.60	63	0.00	31	0.06	29	0.22	23	0.37	28	0.29
Biret 1990		44	0.62	57	0.00	68	0.03	69	0.03	64	0.03	85	0.03
Blet 2003		14	0.74	59	0.00	29	0.07	22	0.31	21	0.34	23	0.32
Block 1995		51	0.60	56	0.00	67	0.04	66	0.04	36	0.16	51	0.08
Blumental 1952		82	0.28	47	0.00	76	0.03	81	0.03	65	0.03	81	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		41	0.63	46	0.00	49	0.04	53	0.04	28	0.21	48	0.09
Brailowsky 1960		36	0.64	17	0.01	64	0.03	74	0.03	52	0.05	71	0.04
Bunin 1987		21	0.71	21	0.01	22	0.07	18	0.36	21	0.36	20	0.36
Bunin 1987b		22	0.71	12	0.02	23	0.10	19	0.36	21	0.36	19	0.36
Chiu 1999		66	0.52	28	0.01	53	0.04	51	0.04	44	0.09	60	0.06
Cohen 1997		79	0.33	66	0.00	82	0.03	75	0.03	66	0.03	83	0.03
Cortot 1951		67	0.52	79	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	47	0.07	70	0.05
Csalog 1996		64	0.54	14	0.01	56	0.04	57	0.04	27	0.29	41	0.11
Czerny 1949		57	0.57	41	0.00	47	0.04	61	0.04	48	0.06	67	0.05
Czerny 1990		18	0.73	60	0.00	17	0.10	20	0.36	18	0.30	22	0.33
Duchoud 2007		48	0.61	86	0.00	46	0.05	48	0.05	42	0.11	57	0.07
Ezaki 2006		2	0.84	4	0.07	2	0.14	2	0.62	4	0.55	2	0.58
Falvay 1989		4	0.83	34	0.00	5	0.11	4	0.55	7	0.49	4	0.52
Farrell 1958		50	0.61	70	0.00	75	0.03	79	0.03	63	0.04	78	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		37	0.64	51	0.00	55	0.04	49	0.04	28	0.28	42	0.11
Fliere 1977		10	0.77	22	0.01	13	0.08	12	0.44	14	0.37	17	0.40
Fou 1978		7	0.78	5	0.06	7	0.11	7	0.53	7	0.51	5	0.52
Francois 1956		25	0.69	42	0.00	14	0.08	16	0.37	16	0.32	21	0.34
Friedman 1923		88	0.00	76	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	51	0.06	88	0.03
Friedman 1923b		87	0.01	90	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	48	0.06	84	0.03
Friedman 1930		84	0.19	78	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	52	0.05	73	0.04
Garcia 2007		77	0.39	84	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	41	0.13	63	0.06
Garcia 2007b		85	0.17	64	0.00	84	0.03	73	0.03	65	0.03	87	0.03
Gierzod 1998		47	0.62	72	0.00	36	0.05	43	0.09	58	0.04	62	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		27	0.69	25	0.01	24	0.07	23	0.31	24	0.27	29	0.29
Groot 1988		3	0.83	7	0.04	4	0.12	5	0.54	4	0.50	6	0.52
Harasiewicz 1955		42	0.63	2	0.09	3	0.12	6	0.54	7	0.44	8	0.49
Hatto 1993		78	0.35	83	0.00	70	0.03	68	0.03	51	0.04	86	0.03
Hatto 1997		73	0.44	36	0.00	61	0.04	59	0.04	62	0.03	80	0.03
Horowitz 1949		59	0.57	53	0.00	40	0.06	37	0.13	27	0.26	35	0.18
Indjic 1988		76	0.39	74	0.00	62	0.03	70	0.03	59	0.03	79	0.03
Kapell 1951		40	0.64	71	0.00	69	0.04	62	0.04	45	0.06	65	0.05
Kissin 1993		6	0.80	30	0.01	8	0.10	13	0.42	14	0.45	12	0.43
Kushner 1989		26	0.69	43	0.00	27	0.07	26	0.27	33	0.22	31	0.24
Luisada 1991		35	0.65	29	0.01	32	0.07	34	0.17	35	0.19	33	0.18
Lushtak 2004		11	0.75	3	0.08	6	0.10	3	0.58	8	0.51	3	0.54
Malcuzynski 1961		5	0.82	26	0.01	9	0.14	8	0.53	16	0.41	9	0.47
Magaloff 1978		20	0.72	48	0.00	28	0.07	30	0.21	29	0.26	32	0.23
Magin 1975		62	0.55	62	0.00	58	0.04	54	0.04	41	0.11	53	0.07
Michalowski 1933		83	0.26	87	0.00	77	0.03	72	0.03	50	0.05	72	0.04
Milkina 1970		12	0.75	15	0.01	20	0.08	27	0.26	16	0.38	25	0.31
Mohovich 1999		1	0.87	1	0.21	1	0.21	1	0.65	2	0.58	1	0.61
Moravec 1969		56	0.57	52	0.00	74	0.03	85	0.03	66	0.04	75	0.03
Morozova 2008		55	0.59	16	0.01	38	0.04	35	0.15	23	0.18	36	0.16
Neighaus 1950		8	0.78	39	0.00	11	0.16	10	0.49	16	0.45	10	0.47
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.41	85	0.00	83	0.04	64	0.04	63	0.03	77	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		34	0.65	35	0.00	35	0.05	39	0.11	57	0.05	54	0.07
Osinska 1989		43	0.62	50	0.00	50	0.04	60	0.04	42	0.11	52	0.07
Pachmann 1927		38	0.64	18	0.01	33	0.05	33	0.17	9	0.52	27	0.30
Paderewski 1930		54	0.59	68	0.00	59	0.05	47	0.05	48	0.05	66	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		17	0.73	10	0.02	15	0.10	14	0.39	6	0.46	14	0.42
Pierdomenico 2008		45	0.62	88	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.07	32	0.18	40	0.11
Poblocka 1999		23	0.70	65	0.00	43	0.05	38	0.13	40	0.15	38	0.14
Rabcewiczowa 1932		58	0.57	24	0.01	52	0.04	50	0.04	34	0.17	50	0.08
Rachmaninoff 1923		70	0.49	32	0.00	39	0.05	42	0.09	39	0.11	44	0.10
Rangell 2001		31	0.66	40	0.00	51	0.04	55	0.04	27	0.22	49	0.09
Richter 1976		29	0.69	23	0.01	21	0.08	24	0.30	6	0.47	18	0.38
Rosen 1989		39	0.64	69	0.00	57	0.04	58	0.04	45	0.05	74	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		68	0.50	81	0.00	72	0.03	80	0.03	43	0.09	68	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		72	0.47	73	0.00	65	0.03	77	0.03	36	0.17	55	0.07
Rosenthal 1931b		74	0.43	80	0.00	79	0.04	52	0.04	39	0.11	59	0.07
Rosenthal 1931c		61	0.56	89	0.00	66	0.03	76	0.03	42	0.11	64	0.06
Rosenthal 1931d		71	0.49	82	0.00	78	0.03	84	0.03	43	0.09	69	0.05
Rossi 2007		81	0.28	44	0.00	71	0.04	67	0.04	16	0.24	43	0.10
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.28	45	0.00	85	0.03	71	0.03	63	0.04	76	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		24	0.70	6	0.05	19	0.07	28	0.23	20	0.45	24	0.32
Rubinstein 1966		16	0.73	20	0.01	26	0.07	25	0.29	3	0.64	13	0.43
Schilhawsky 1960		53	0.59	77	0.00	41	0.05	41	0.10	50	0.05	56	0.07
Shebanova 2002		30	0.68	31	0.00	42	0.05	36	0.14	34	0.18	37	0.16
Smith 1975		15	0.73	13	0.02	10	0.11	15	0.38	27	0.24	26	0.30
Sokolov 2002		28	0.69	33	0.00	34	0.04	31	0.21	32	0.27	30	0.24
Sztompka 1959		32	0.65	54	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.05	35	0.22	45	0.10
Tomsic 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1932		63	0.54	38	0.00	48	0.04	63	0.04	32	0.25	47	0.10
Uninsky 1971		49	0.61	37	0.00	54	0.05	46	0.05	35	0.21	46	0.10
Wasowski 1980		65	0.52	11	0.02	30	0.07	32	0.18	29	0.18	34	0.18
Zak 1937		19	0.72	75	0.00	25	0.09	17	0.37	9	0.45	16	0.41
Zak 1951		13	0.75	9	0.03	12	0.09	9	0.51	6	0.50	7	0.50
Random 1		89	-0.08	55	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	43	0.12	82	0.03
Random 2		90	-0.20	61	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	49	0.04	89	0.02
Random 3		86	0.01	58	0.00	88	0.01	88	0.01	78	0.02	90	0.01

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).