Rabcewiczowa 1932

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		11	0.68	50	0.00	13	0.09	8	0.47	22	0.28	14	0.36
Anderszewski 2003		50	0.50	65	0.00	50	0.06	48	0.06	54	0.04	51	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		46	0.51	76	0.00	46	0.05	50	0.05	66	0.03	61	0.04
Bacha 2000		71	0.38	33	0.00	66	0.03	71	0.03	49	0.06	53	0.04
Badura 1965		52	0.49	88	0.00	60	0.04	56	0.04	72	0.03	76	0.03
Barbosa 1983		39	0.55	18	0.01	23	0.07	25	0.32	27	0.33	17	0.32
Biret 1990		12	0.68	6	0.05	8	0.10	13	0.44	18	0.30	15	0.36
Blet 2003		34	0.57	77	0.00	38	0.08	31	0.21	53	0.05	34	0.10
Block 1995		61	0.45	27	0.00	54	0.04	54	0.04	68	0.03	77	0.03
Blumental 1952		64	0.42	59	0.00	36	0.07	32	0.21	24	0.22	29	0.21
Boshniakovich 1969		41	0.54	28	0.00	71	0.03	67	0.03	59	0.04	78	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		70	0.38	70	0.00	84	0.03	76	0.03	81	0.03	62	0.03
Bunin 1987		37	0.56	91	0.00	42	0.05	41	0.13	55	0.05	41	0.08
Bunin 1987b		36	0.56	82	0.00	43	0.04	42	0.12	57	0.04	44	0.07
Chiu 1999		68	0.40	11	0.02	56	0.04	61	0.04	64	0.04	56	0.04
Cohen 1997		87	0.17	29	0.00	83	0.02	81	0.02	78	0.03	87	0.02
Cortot 1951		13	0.67	22	0.01	17	0.10	15	0.41	16	0.43	7	0.42
Csalog 1996		74	0.32	67	0.00	82	0.02	82	0.02	59	0.04	72	0.03
Czerny 1949		1	0.80	1	0.20	1	0.20	1	0.65	4	0.59	1	0.62
Czerny 1990		2	0.78	31	0.00	6	0.14	4	0.49	18	0.31	11	0.39
Duchoud 2007		27	0.62	90	0.00	26	0.07	19	0.37	34	0.25	20	0.30
Ezaki 2006		10	0.69	19	0.01	20	0.06	20	0.36	49	0.06	30	0.15
Falvay 1989		48	0.51	49	0.00	57	0.04	57	0.04	68	0.04	58	0.04
Farrell 1958		32	0.58	43	0.00	34	0.05	28	0.23	22	0.23	27	0.23
Ferenczy 1958		29	0.61	39	0.00	19	0.08	22	0.35	15	0.41	12	0.38
Fliere 1977		26	0.63	79	0.00	49	0.06	49	0.06	64	0.04	49	0.05
Fou 1978		75	0.32	62	0.00	67	0.03	73	0.03	74	0.04	64	0.03
Francois 1956		8	0.70	4	0.07	3	0.17	10	0.47	11	0.38	8	0.42
Friedman 1923		83	0.21	80	0.00	35	0.05	40	0.15	10	0.45	25	0.26
Friedman 1923b		84	0.21	81	0.00	30	0.05	39	0.15	10	0.44	24	0.26
Friedman 1930		44	0.52	56	0.00	18	0.09	18	0.40	12	0.41	9	0.40
Garcia 2007		77	0.29	83	0.00	73	0.03	68	0.03	59	0.04	75	0.03
Garcia 2007b		78	0.27	66	0.00	64	0.04	62	0.04	28	0.16	43	0.08
Gierzod 1998		21	0.65	15	0.01	21	0.07	16	0.41	21	0.23	18	0.31
Gornostaeva 1994		6	0.72	23	0.01	10	0.09	21	0.36	30	0.21	23	0.27
Groot 1988		31	0.59	41	0.00	33	0.06	43	0.11	68	0.03	48	0.06
Harasiewicz 1955		57	0.46	20	0.01	31	0.05	33	0.17	60	0.04	42	0.08
Hatto 1993		85	0.21	84	0.00	63	0.03	74	0.03	70	0.03	80	0.03
Hatto 1997		76	0.31	52	0.00	51	0.07	46	0.07	61	0.03	52	0.05
Horowitz 1949		67	0.40	60	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	71	0.03	68	0.03
Indjic 1988		82	0.22	85	0.00	61	0.04	60	0.04	72	0.03	71	0.03
Kapell 1951		7	0.70	8	0.02	7	0.09	9	0.47	22	0.41	5	0.44
Kissin 1993		60	0.45	68	0.00	70	0.03	66	0.03	74	0.03	70	0.03
Kushner 1989		23	0.64	55	0.00	32	0.06	38	0.16	45	0.12	31	0.14
Luisada 1991		49	0.51	86	0.00	59	0.05	52	0.05	63	0.04	55	0.04
Lushtak 2004		51	0.49	63	0.00	37	0.08	30	0.22	56	0.04	38	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		20	0.65	51	0.00	29	0.06	27	0.26	61	0.04	33	0.10
Magaloff 1978		35	0.56	14	0.01	53	0.04	53	0.04	77	0.03	63	0.03
Magin 1975		69	0.39	21	0.01	78	0.02	85	0.02	72	0.03	84	0.02
Michalowski 1933		17	0.65	5	0.06	5	0.21	3	0.52	11	0.45	3	0.48
Milkina 1970		58	0.46	16	0.01	62	0.03	72	0.03	76	0.03	66	0.03
Mohovich 1999		25	0.63	36	0.00	39	0.07	29	0.23	52	0.04	35	0.10
Moravec 1969		43	0.53	53	0.00	58	0.04	63	0.04	47	0.05	54	0.04
Morozova 2008		38	0.56	54	0.00	27	0.06	34	0.17	62	0.04	40	0.08
Neighaus 1950		14	0.67	9	0.02	11	0.09	7	0.48	36	0.18	21	0.29
Niedzielski 1931		66	0.41	87	0.00	77	0.02	83	0.02	86	0.02	83	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		28	0.62	34	0.00	40	0.07	37	0.16	54	0.05	37	0.09
Osinska 1989		4	0.75	38	0.00	15	0.09	17	0.41	11	0.38	10	0.39
Pachmann 1927		79	0.25	48	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	72	0.03	69	0.03
Paderewski 1930		18	0.65	10	0.02	25	0.08	24	0.33	9	0.40	13	0.36
Perlemuter 1992		47	0.51	75	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	58	0.04	50	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		30	0.60	46	0.00	52	0.04	58	0.04	48	0.04	59	0.04
Poblocka 1999		19	0.65	30	0.00	24	0.08	23	0.35	35	0.21	22	0.27
Rabcewiczowa 1932		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rachmaninoff 1923		53	0.49	37	0.00	48	0.05	51	0.05	65	0.04	57	0.04
Rangell 2001		54	0.48	24	0.01	72	0.03	64	0.03	70	0.03	79	0.03
Richter 1976		72	0.35	58	0.00	81	0.03	78	0.03	86	0.02	85	0.02
Rosen 1989		24	0.63	32	0.00	22	0.07	26	0.32	26	0.34	16	0.33
Rosenthal 1930		45	0.52	40	0.00	55	0.04	59	0.04	60	0.04	60	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		81	0.23	72	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		86	0.20	78	0.00	87	0.02	89	0.02	82	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		63	0.42	44	0.00	79	0.03	75	0.03	70	0.03	81	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		80	0.25	61	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	88	0.02	88	0.02
Rossi 2007		59	0.46	13	0.01	28	0.08	36	0.17	10	0.28	28	0.22
Rubinstein 1939		88	0.11	74	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	81	0.03	82	0.02
Rubinstein 1952		73	0.34	35	0.00	85	0.02	84	0.02	82	0.03	90	0.02
Rubinstein 1966		56	0.47	47	0.00	65	0.03	69	0.03	68	0.04	73	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		40	0.54	71	0.00	44	0.04	45	0.09	59	0.05	45	0.07
Shebanova 2002		55	0.47	69	0.00	69	0.03	65	0.03	65	0.04	74	0.03
Smith 1975		9	0.69	12	0.01	16	0.11	6	0.48	44	0.11	26	0.23
Sokolov 2002		15	0.67	7	0.03	9	0.08	14	0.41	38	0.22	19	0.30
Sztompka 1959		3	0.77	2	0.17	2	0.25	2	0.56	6	0.51	2	0.53
Tomsic 1995		33	0.57	17	0.01	41	0.07	35	0.17	51	0.04	39	0.08
Uninsky 1932		22	0.64	3	0.12	4	0.17	5	0.49	7	0.46	4	0.47
Uninsky 1971		16	0.66	25	0.01	12	0.10	11	0.46	22	0.41	6	0.43
Wasowski 1980		42	0.53	57	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.10	72	0.04	46	0.06
Zak 1937		65	0.42	89	0.00	74	0.04	55	0.04	79	0.03	65	0.03
Zak 1951		62	0.43	73	0.00	68	0.03	70	0.03	80	0.03	67	0.03
Average		5	0.72	45	0.00	14	0.08	12	0.45	68	0.03	32	0.12
Random 1		91	-0.17	42	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	87	0.02	91	0.01
Random 2		90	0.00	26	0.01	89	0.02	87	0.02	28	0.20	47	0.06
Random 3		89	0.06	64	0.00	75	0.03	77	0.03	17	0.35	36	0.10

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).