Moravec 1969

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		7	0.71	24	0.01	24	0.08	18	0.36	39	0.10	27	0.19
Anderszewski 2003		71	0.39	26	0.01	53	0.03	70	0.03	73	0.03	71	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		37	0.57	14	0.03	3	0.10	13	0.46	30	0.25	14	0.34
Bacha 2000		44	0.55	74	0.00	39	0.06	35	0.15	36	0.16	30	0.15
Badura 1965		57	0.50	33	0.00	48	0.04	49	0.04	48	0.05	60	0.04
Barbosa 1983		59	0.49	85	0.00	71	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04	55	0.04
Biret 1990		22	0.63	55	0.00	17	0.08	17	0.39	37	0.16	22	0.25
Blet 2003		32	0.58	78	0.00	64	0.04	56	0.04	67	0.04	56	0.04
Block 1995		58	0.50	81	0.00	74	0.04	54	0.04	59	0.04	61	0.04
Blumental 1952		64	0.45	9	0.04	8	0.08	19	0.35	5	0.42	11	0.38
Boshniakovich 1969		65	0.44	44	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	82	0.03	74	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		48	0.53	43	0.00	57	0.04	57	0.04	69	0.04	51	0.04
Bunin 1987		70	0.40	72	0.00	83	0.02	80	0.02	86	0.02	88	0.02
Bunin 1987b		69	0.40	79	0.00	82	0.02	85	0.02	86	0.02	84	0.02
Chiu 1999		67	0.43	65	0.00	37	0.06	33	0.18	37	0.14	29	0.16
Cohen 1997		80	0.30	51	0.00	77	0.03	78	0.03	56	0.04	76	0.03
Cortot 1951		17	0.65	18	0.02	20	0.07	16	0.42	19	0.40	7	0.41
Csalog 1996		23	0.63	19	0.01	27	0.08	28	0.22	21	0.38	17	0.29
Czerny 1949		10	0.70	6	0.06	10	0.10	2	0.58	15	0.42	3	0.49
Czerny 1990		3	0.74	10	0.04	9	0.08	1	0.61	33	0.23	13	0.37
Duchoud 2007		28	0.60	71	0.00	38	0.06	34	0.18	61	0.04	39	0.08
Ezaki 2006		42	0.55	86	0.00	52	0.03	73	0.03	79	0.03	64	0.03
Falvay 1989		11	0.69	56	0.00	21	0.08	11	0.46	39	0.13	24	0.24
Farrell 1958		33	0.58	63	0.00	63	0.04	55	0.04	63	0.04	53	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		53	0.52	35	0.00	31	0.06	38	0.13	60	0.04	42	0.07
Fliere 1977		24	0.62	64	0.00	40	0.05	36	0.14	74	0.03	43	0.06
Fou 1978		66	0.44	47	0.00	65	0.04	58	0.04	65	0.05	54	0.04
Francois 1956		2	0.74	23	0.01	11	0.08	15	0.43	27	0.23	16	0.31
Friedman 1923		89	0.02	36	0.00	90	0.02	87	0.02	56	0.06	82	0.03
Friedman 1923b		88	0.03	75	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	67	0.05	77	0.03
Friedman 1930		83	0.22	38	0.00	60	0.04	48	0.04	55	0.05	59	0.04
Garcia 2007		84	0.21	87	0.00	86	0.02	90	0.02	72	0.03	87	0.02
Garcia 2007b		90	-0.05	82	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	79	0.03	90	0.02
Gierzod 1998		8	0.71	2	0.08	2	0.08	3	0.54	11	0.35	5	0.43
Gornostaeva 1994		39	0.57	45	0.00	61	0.04	64	0.04	61	0.04	62	0.04
Groot 1988		16	0.66	73	0.00	47	0.04	53	0.04	77	0.03	79	0.03
Harasiewicz 1955		74	0.37	29	0.00	54	0.03	69	0.03	74	0.03	80	0.03
Hatto 1993		81	0.28	60	0.00	33	0.06	29	0.21	42	0.09	31	0.14
Hatto 1997		77	0.34	52	0.00	36	0.06	32	0.19	51	0.04	35	0.09
Horowitz 1949		21	0.64	7	0.05	19	0.08	14	0.45	23	0.31	12	0.37
Indjic 1988		78	0.31	40	0.00	34	0.06	31	0.20	37	0.14	28	0.17
Kapell 1951		9	0.70	22	0.01	25	0.10	21	0.35	32	0.29	15	0.32
Kissin 1993		25	0.62	83	0.00	23	0.07	20	0.35	39	0.18	21	0.25
Kushner 1989		6	0.71	11	0.04	14	0.13	9	0.50	20	0.33	6	0.41
Luisada 1991		54	0.51	17	0.02	16	0.10	24	0.32	31	0.24	18	0.28
Lushtak 2004		68	0.42	69	0.00	55	0.04	66	0.04	77	0.03	72	0.03
Malcuzynski 1961		14	0.68	30	0.00	28	0.07	27	0.24	82	0.03	37	0.08
Magaloff 1978		38	0.57	70	0.00	62	0.04	65	0.04	69	0.03	66	0.03
Magin 1975		73	0.37	41	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.10	65	0.03	47	0.05
Michalowski 1933		82	0.26	31	0.00	56	0.03	68	0.03	46	0.07	48	0.05
Milkina 1970		5	0.71	13	0.03	12	0.10	12	0.46	22	0.33	9	0.39
Mohovich 1999		36	0.57	66	0.00	69	0.04	60	0.04	87	0.03	75	0.03
Moravec 1969		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Morozova 2008		62	0.47	15	0.03	13	0.09	23	0.33	21	0.20	20	0.26
Neighaus 1950		45	0.54	57	0.00	43	0.04	44	0.08	66	0.04	46	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		13	0.69	1	0.09	1	0.08	8	0.51	1	0.61	1	0.56
Ohlsson 1999		26	0.61	21	0.01	22	0.09	22	0.35	30	0.20	19	0.26
Osinska 1989		1	0.74	5	0.06	7	0.08	5	0.53	15	0.38	4	0.45
Pachmann 1927		79	0.30	54	0.00	84	0.02	82	0.02	82	0.03	85	0.02
Paderewski 1930		30	0.59	32	0.00	32	0.06	41	0.11	60	0.03	44	0.06
Perlemuter 1992		61	0.47	37	0.00	73	0.03	74	0.03	82	0.03	65	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		52	0.52	28	0.01	35	0.05	30	0.21	31	0.20	26	0.20
Poblocka 1999		18	0.64	27	0.01	26	0.08	26	0.29	60	0.04	34	0.11
Rabcewiczowa 1932		47	0.53	49	0.00	59	0.05	47	0.05	63	0.04	52	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		49	0.52	12	0.04	18	0.08	25	0.30	31	0.19	23	0.24
Rangell 2001		50	0.52	53	0.00	66	0.04	52	0.04	61	0.04	63	0.04
Richter 1976		55	0.50	88	0.00	72	0.03	72	0.03	53	0.04	69	0.03
Rosen 1989		31	0.58	76	0.00	49	0.04	51	0.04	65	0.03	73	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		40	0.56	61	0.00	58	0.04	61	0.04	46	0.06	49	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		72	0.38	68	0.00	80	0.03	71	0.03	81	0.02	86	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		76	0.35	39	0.00	79	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		51	0.52	34	0.00	70	0.04	50	0.04	69	0.03	81	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		63	0.46	42	0.00	76	0.03	77	0.03	71	0.03	78	0.03
Rossi 2007		85	0.13	89	0.00	81	0.02	83	0.02	62	0.03	83	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		75	0.35	25	0.01	78	0.02	81	0.02	34	0.23	41	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		27	0.61	20	0.01	44	0.04	43	0.08	30	0.23	32	0.14
Rubinstein 1966		29	0.59	62	0.00	67	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.04	57	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		35	0.57	77	0.00	46	0.04	59	0.04	64	0.04	58	0.04
Shebanova 2002		12	0.69	4	0.06	4	0.09	4	0.54	11	0.49	2	0.51
Smith 1975		43	0.55	84	0.00	50	0.05	46	0.05	85	0.02	67	0.03
Sokolov 2002		46	0.54	67	0.00	29	0.06	40	0.12	60	0.04	40	0.07
Sztompka 1959		41	0.56	8	0.05	30	0.06	39	0.12	53	0.06	38	0.08
Tomsic 1995		34	0.57	48	0.00	51	0.03	67	0.03	86	0.03	68	0.03
Uninsky 1932		60	0.48	46	0.00	45	0.04	45	0.08	60	0.04	45	0.06
Uninsky 1971		56	0.50	90	0.00	68	0.03	75	0.03	72	0.03	70	0.03
Wasowski 1980		20	0.64	59	0.00	41	0.07	37	0.13	14	0.32	25	0.20
Zak 1937		15	0.66	3	0.07	5	0.11	7	0.51	21	0.31	8	0.40
Zak 1951		19	0.64	16	0.02	6	0.10	6	0.51	28	0.28	10	0.38
Average		4	0.74	58	0.00	15	0.10	10	0.47	70	0.03	33	0.12
Random 1		91	-0.22	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	88	0.02	91	0.01
Random 2		87	0.05	50	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	8	0.39	36	0.09
Random 3		86	0.05	80	0.00	88	0.02	84	0.02	34	0.15	50	0.05

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).