Rachmaninoff 1923

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		15	0.62	34	0.00	25	0.09	25	0.26	33	0.19	26	0.22
Anderszewski 2003		49	0.48	81	0.00	51	0.04	55	0.04	38	0.15	50	0.08
Ashkenazy 1981		61	0.44	26	0.01	39	0.05	38	0.14	62	0.03	57	0.06
Bacha 2000		85	0.21	73	0.00	84	0.03	78	0.03	73	0.03	72	0.03
Badura 1965		39	0.51	21	0.01	46	0.04	51	0.04	33	0.22	47	0.09
Barbosa 1983		42	0.49	60	0.00	68	0.03	68	0.03	58	0.04	79	0.03
Biret 1990		37	0.52	45	0.00	50	0.04	62	0.04	60	0.04	71	0.04
Blet 2003		24	0.57	40	0.00	34	0.05	37	0.14	44	0.09	41	0.11
Block 1995		63	0.43	67	0.00	71	0.04	56	0.04	60	0.04	68	0.04
Blumental 1952		81	0.28	58	0.00	73	0.04	50	0.04	60	0.04	70	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		57	0.45	43	0.00	36	0.05	45	0.08	39	0.14	43	0.11
Brailowsky 1960		53	0.47	41	0.00	76	0.05	46	0.05	59	0.04	63	0.04
Bunin 1987		4	0.68	4	0.09	5	0.11	12	0.38	15	0.43	9	0.40
Bunin 1987b		5	0.68	8	0.04	6	0.15	13	0.38	15	0.43	7	0.40
Chiu 1999		59	0.45	10	0.02	35	0.04	35	0.15	32	0.21	34	0.18
Cohen 1997		88	-0.10	61	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	87	0.02	91	0.01
Cortot 1951		52	0.47	68	0.00	66	0.04	60	0.04	36	0.20	48	0.09
Csalog 1996		87	0.13	77	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.02
Czerny 1949		10	0.64	82	0.00	17	0.08	9	0.40	22	0.37	11	0.38
Czerny 1990		3	0.68	1	0.15	1	0.15	1	0.61	10	0.42	2	0.51
Duchoud 2007		11	0.64	13	0.01	16	0.07	17	0.34	30	0.29	18	0.31
Ezaki 2006		8	0.64	37	0.00	9	0.10	16	0.35	35	0.17	23	0.24
Falvay 1989		41	0.50	51	0.00	42	0.04	42	0.10	64	0.04	55	0.06
Farrell 1958		43	0.49	28	0.01	54	0.03	76	0.03	25	0.23	49	0.08
Ferenczy 1958		74	0.35	46	0.00	77	0.03	83	0.03	52	0.04	81	0.03
Fliere 1977		13	0.63	42	0.00	14	0.07	18	0.33	41	0.13	27	0.21
Fou 1978		58	0.45	30	0.01	69	0.04	59	0.04	58	0.05	65	0.04
Francois 1956		7	0.65	29	0.01	24	0.07	21	0.29	21	0.29	20	0.29
Friedman 1923		73	0.35	11	0.02	33	0.07	34	0.16	6	0.51	21	0.29
Friedman 1923b		71	0.37	39	0.00	32	0.06	33	0.17	6	0.50	19	0.29
Friedman 1930		51	0.48	12	0.02	10	0.09	22	0.28	7	0.46	12	0.36
Garcia 2007		70	0.37	75	0.00	59	0.04	58	0.04	24	0.29	42	0.11
Garcia 2007b		86	0.18	86	0.00	78	0.03	74	0.03	61	0.04	84	0.03
Gierzod 1998		65	0.42	74	0.00	65	0.03	71	0.03	60	0.04	82	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		26	0.57	32	0.01	31	0.06	30	0.20	38	0.17	35	0.18
Groot 1988		20	0.60	23	0.01	27	0.06	27	0.24	33	0.19	29	0.21
Harasiewicz 1955		22	0.58	17	0.01	12	0.07	10	0.39	25	0.28	16	0.33
Hatto 1993		79	0.31	89	0.00	58	0.03	81	0.03	38	0.14	58	0.06
Hatto 1997		68	0.39	78	0.00	48	0.04	52	0.04	28	0.20	46	0.09
Horowitz 1949		14	0.63	3	0.09	4	0.12	2	0.57	1	0.61	1	0.59
Indjic 1988		76	0.34	57	0.00	56	0.03	80	0.03	36	0.14	56	0.06
Kapell 1951		32	0.53	48	0.00	60	0.04	66	0.04	55	0.04	66	0.04
Kissin 1993		62	0.43	59	0.00	72	0.05	47	0.05	56	0.04	67	0.04
Kushner 1989		23	0.58	71	0.00	28	0.06	26	0.24	40	0.17	30	0.20
Luisada 1991		40	0.50	69	0.00	57	0.03	72	0.03	49	0.05	62	0.04
Lushtak 2004		33	0.53	87	0.00	22	0.07	23	0.28	46	0.07	39	0.14
Malcuzynski 1961		9	0.64	31	0.01	11	0.08	8	0.40	26	0.28	15	0.33
Magaloff 1978		30	0.54	20	0.01	30	0.06	28	0.22	36	0.17	32	0.19
Magin 1975		35	0.52	36	0.00	29	0.05	29	0.20	16	0.27	25	0.23
Michalowski 1933		78	0.31	55	0.00	52	0.04	64	0.04	49	0.07	61	0.05
Milkina 1970		66	0.42	70	0.00	74	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.04	76	0.03
Mohovich 1999		27	0.57	54	0.00	26	0.06	24	0.27	33	0.15	31	0.20
Moravec 1969		36	0.52	7	0.04	15	0.07	31	0.19	25	0.30	24	0.24
Morozova 2008		1	0.70	2	0.13	2	0.15	4	0.53	2	0.47	3	0.50
Neighaus 1950		17	0.61	6	0.06	7	0.11	6	0.44	22	0.35	10	0.39
Niedzielski 1931		46	0.49	38	0.00	43	0.04	39	0.11	8	0.41	28	0.21
Ohlsson 1999		34	0.53	14	0.01	47	0.04	54	0.04	49	0.06	60	0.05
Osinska 1989		60	0.44	56	0.00	75	0.04	53	0.04	78	0.03	73	0.03
Pachmann 1927		80	0.29	44	0.00	79	0.03	79	0.03	66	0.04	78	0.03
Paderewski 1930		77	0.33	52	0.00	82	0.03	84	0.03	62	0.03	77	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		12	0.63	15	0.01	13	0.10	7	0.42	9	0.43	6	0.42
Pierdomenico 2008		56	0.46	47	0.00	63	0.04	49	0.04	38	0.14	52	0.07
Poblocka 1999		67	0.40	90	0.00	64	0.03	82	0.03	58	0.04	74	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		48	0.49	53	0.00	67	0.04	65	0.04	51	0.05	64	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rangell 2001		72	0.36	72	0.00	80	0.04	57	0.04	73	0.03	83	0.03
Richter 1976		47	0.49	76	0.00	53	0.03	73	0.03	39	0.10	59	0.05
Rosen 1989		64	0.43	65	0.00	70	0.04	48	0.04	51	0.04	69	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		19	0.60	35	0.00	20	0.07	19	0.32	9	0.51	8	0.40
Rosenthal 1931		44	0.49	49	0.00	49	0.04	63	0.04	23	0.34	40	0.12
Rosenthal 1931b		55	0.46	19	0.01	40	0.05	43	0.10	24	0.28	36	0.17
Rosenthal 1931c		38	0.51	66	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.14	31	0.21	37	0.17
Rosenthal 1931d		54	0.47	25	0.01	55	0.03	75	0.03	32	0.16	54	0.07
Rossi 2007		69	0.37	91	0.00	62	0.03	70	0.03	24	0.18	51	0.07
Rubinstein 1939		84	0.22	18	0.01	85	0.02	85	0.02	58	0.05	75	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		83	0.26	79	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	75	0.03	90	0.02
Rubinstein 1966		75	0.34	50	0.00	81	0.03	69	0.03	69	0.04	80	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		21	0.59	80	0.00	21	0.07	15	0.35	23	0.29	17	0.32
Shebanova 2002		82	0.26	63	0.00	83	0.03	67	0.03	87	0.02	86	0.02
Smith 1975		29	0.54	88	0.00	37	0.04	32	0.18	47	0.05	45	0.09
Sokolov 2002		6	0.68	16	0.01	8	0.14	5	0.49	16	0.43	4	0.46
Sztompka 1959		50	0.48	22	0.01	61	0.04	61	0.04	45	0.13	53	0.07
Tomsic 1995		45	0.49	33	0.00	41	0.04	40	0.11	43	0.09	44	0.10
Uninsky 1932		16	0.62	9	0.02	18	0.07	11	0.38	4	0.51	5	0.44
Uninsky 1971		31	0.54	83	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.09	34	0.27	38	0.16
Wasowski 1980		28	0.57	27	0.01	44	0.05	41	0.10	17	0.31	33	0.18
Zak 1937		25	0.57	64	0.00	23	0.07	20	0.31	30	0.25	22	0.28
Zak 1951		18	0.61	24	0.01	19	0.06	14	0.36	23	0.33	14	0.34
Average		2	0.69	5	0.08	3	0.16	3	0.54	32	0.23	13	0.35
Random 1		91	-0.14	84	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	56	0.04	88	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.11	85	0.00	89	0.01	88	0.01	61	0.03	87	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.11	62	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	71	0.03	89	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).