Rosenthal 1931

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		60	0.36	19	0.00	72	0.03	68	0.03	75	0.03	70	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		19	0.54	41	0.00	10	0.10	21	0.36	32	0.21	15	0.27
Ashkenazy 1981		46	0.44	69	0.00	51	0.05	48	0.05	65	0.03	60	0.04
Bacha 2000		58	0.37	58	0.00	79	0.02	80	0.02	74	0.03	76	0.02
Badura 1965		67	0.33	42	0.00	52	0.05	49	0.05	77	0.03	59	0.04
Barbosa 1983		76	0.29	15	0.00	75	0.02	77	0.02	80	0.02	86	0.02
Biret 1990		52	0.39	38	0.00	67	0.04	62	0.04	87	0.02	74	0.03
Blet 2003		49	0.39	23	0.00	71	0.03	73	0.03	79	0.03	64	0.03
Block 1995		17	0.55	70	0.00	25	0.06	30	0.30	30	0.24	16	0.27
Blumental 1952		86	0.13	22	0.00	81	0.02	84	0.02	83	0.02	89	0.02
Boshniakovich 1969		45	0.44	71	0.00	29	0.07	25	0.34	51	0.05	29	0.13
Brailowsky 1960		9	0.62	59	0.00	9	0.15	10	0.46	11	0.41	6	0.43
Bunin 1987		26	0.52	72	0.00	34	0.05	27	0.33	43	0.12	22	0.20
Bunin 1987b		27	0.52	73	0.00	33	0.05	26	0.33	43	0.12	21	0.20
Chiu 1999		74	0.30	74	0.00	56	0.05	51	0.05	82	0.03	54	0.04
Cohen 1997		63	0.35	11	0.00	57	0.05	53	0.05	34	0.19	39	0.10
Cortot 1951		72	0.31	9	0.00	86	0.02	78	0.02	81	0.03	91	0.02
Csalog 1996		84	0.20	50	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	67	0.03	87	0.02
Czerny 1949		62	0.35	39	0.00	64	0.03	69	0.03	62	0.04	68	0.03
Czerny 1990		50	0.39	26	0.00	69	0.03	71	0.03	80	0.03	73	0.03
Duchoud 2007		47	0.41	43	0.00	68	0.04	59	0.04	81	0.02	71	0.03
Ezaki 2006		22	0.53	16	0.00	38	0.06	32	0.24	64	0.04	35	0.10
Falvay 1989		21	0.53	30	0.00	20	0.07	28	0.32	73	0.03	37	0.10
Farrell 1958		37	0.48	36	0.00	49	0.05	52	0.05	53	0.04	55	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		73	0.31	17	0.00	83	0.02	83	0.02	63	0.04	66	0.03
Fliere 1977		11	0.61	60	0.00	17	0.10	13	0.42	52	0.05	26	0.14
Fou 1978		13	0.58	51	0.00	15	0.12	12	0.45	30	0.32	7	0.38
Francois 1956		41	0.47	37	0.00	40	0.05	43	0.11	80	0.03	48	0.06
Friedman 1923		87	0.13	75	0.00	60	0.04	60	0.04	46	0.07	52	0.05
Friedman 1923b		85	0.14	76	0.00	61	0.05	50	0.05	46	0.07	46	0.06
Friedman 1930		77	0.27	31	0.00	58	0.04	57	0.04	68	0.04	57	0.04
Garcia 2007		69	0.33	77	0.00	55	0.04	58	0.04	64	0.04	58	0.04
Garcia 2007b		82	0.22	40	0.00	48	0.04	55	0.04	20	0.22	40	0.09
Gierzod 1998		32	0.49	13	0.00	19	0.07	40	0.12	58	0.04	44	0.07
Gornostaeva 1994		8	0.62	44	0.00	8	0.11	11	0.45	22	0.29	9	0.36
Groot 1988		12	0.60	78	0.00	5	0.18	6	0.52	26	0.25	10	0.36
Harasiewicz 1955		18	0.55	14	0.00	7	0.10	7	0.50	24	0.29	8	0.38
Hatto 1993		68	0.33	79	0.00	59	0.04	61	0.04	69	0.03	75	0.03
Hatto 1997		66	0.33	52	0.00	63	0.03	64	0.03	65	0.03	65	0.03
Horowitz 1949		30	0.50	61	0.00	22	0.06	20	0.37	32	0.21	14	0.28
Indjic 1988		71	0.32	45	0.00	62	0.03	67	0.03	56	0.03	63	0.03
Kapell 1951		57	0.37	80	0.00	77	0.03	75	0.03	90	0.02	82	0.02
Kissin 1993		31	0.50	62	0.00	21	0.09	29	0.31	64	0.04	32	0.11
Kushner 1989		6	0.63	63	0.00	18	0.10	19	0.38	48	0.05	27	0.14
Luisada 1991		38	0.48	64	0.00	50	0.05	54	0.05	64	0.04	53	0.04
Lushtak 2004		61	0.36	46	0.00	53	0.04	56	0.04	81	0.02	72	0.03
Malcuzynski 1961		10	0.62	81	0.00	16	0.10	15	0.41	39	0.13	19	0.23
Magaloff 1978		5	0.68	82	0.00	4	0.20	5	0.58	25	0.33	5	0.44
Magin 1975		15	0.57	83	0.00	26	0.08	17	0.38	26	0.22	12	0.29
Michalowski 1933		88	0.08	65	0.00	76	0.02	76	0.02	80	0.03	85	0.02
Milkina 1970		16	0.56	47	0.00	14	0.08	16	0.40	33	0.22	11	0.30
Mohovich 1999		25	0.52	5	0.00	13	0.11	14	0.41	42	0.09	23	0.19
Moravec 1969		56	0.38	20	0.00	78	0.02	81	0.02	71	0.03	77	0.02
Morozova 2008		42	0.46	32	0.00	31	0.08	24	0.34	80	0.03	38	0.10
Neighaus 1950		39	0.47	84	0.00	39	0.07	35	0.19	86	0.02	47	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		70	0.32	53	0.00	73	0.03	74	0.03	76	0.02	80	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		51	0.39	66	0.00	66	0.02	79	0.02	87	0.02	84	0.02
Osinska 1989		54	0.38	85	0.00	70	0.03	63	0.03	80	0.03	61	0.03
Pachmann 1927		59	0.37	86	0.00	32	0.04	34	0.20	35	0.22	20	0.21
Paderewski 1930		55	0.38	54	0.00	65	0.03	66	0.03	48	0.05	56	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		33	0.49	48	0.00	35	0.05	33	0.21	48	0.05	36	0.10
Pierdomenico 2008		23	0.52	27	0.00	24	0.05	18	0.38	35	0.17	18	0.25
Poblocka 1999		64	0.34	87	0.00	82	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02	79	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		80	0.23	55	0.00	84	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		34	0.49	12	0.00	30	0.07	23	0.34	63	0.04	30	0.12
Rangell 2001		24	0.52	49	0.00	28	0.06	22	0.35	48	0.06	28	0.14
Richter 1976		20	0.53	28	0.00	27	0.06	31	0.28	21	0.24	17	0.26
Rosen 1989		36	0.48	21	0.00	42	0.05	45	0.10	73	0.03	51	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.71	24	0.00	6	0.12	4	0.63	2	0.62	4	0.62
Rosenthal 1931		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.97	1	0.95	1	0.94	1	0.98	1	0.97	1	0.97
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.80	4	0.00	3	0.62	3	0.78	2	0.79	3	0.78
Rosenthal 1931d		2	0.92	2	0.01	2	0.87	2	0.93	2	0.92	2	0.92
Rossi 2007		78	0.25	33	0.00	41	0.05	44	0.10	49	0.04	45	0.06
Rubinstein 1939		53	0.39	88	0.00	23	0.05	38	0.16	7	0.49	13	0.28
Rubinstein 1952		48	0.41	89	0.00	43	0.05	39	0.15	35	0.18	25	0.16
Rubinstein 1966		43	0.45	34	0.00	45	0.06	41	0.12	44	0.11	33	0.11
Schilhawsky 1960		28	0.51	67	0.00	46	0.06	47	0.06	68	0.04	50	0.05
Shebanova 2002		75	0.30	25	0.00	80	0.03	72	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.03
Smith 1975		14	0.58	3	0.00	11	0.14	8	0.50	46	0.06	24	0.17
Sokolov 2002		29	0.51	68	0.00	47	0.07	46	0.07	72	0.03	49	0.05
Sztompka 1959		81	0.22	90	0.00	85	0.02	82	0.02	76	0.03	83	0.02
Tomsic 1995		40	0.47	6	0.00	36	0.05	37	0.17	78	0.03	43	0.07
Uninsky 1932		83	0.21	91	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	84	0.02	88	0.02
Uninsky 1971		65	0.34	8	0.00	74	0.03	70	0.03	71	0.03	62	0.03
Wasowski 1980		79	0.24	35	0.00	88	0.02	85	0.02	86	0.02	78	0.02
Zak 1937		44	0.45	7	0.00	44	0.05	42	0.12	65	0.04	42	0.07
Zak 1951		35	0.48	18	0.00	37	0.07	36	0.18	71	0.04	41	0.08
Average		7	0.62	10	0.00	12	0.09	9	0.49	82	0.03	31	0.12
Random 1		89	0.04	29	0.00	54	0.03	65	0.03	7	0.43	34	0.11
Random 2		91	-0.08	56	0.00	90	0.01	89	0.01	41	0.12	69	0.03
Random 3		90	0.00	57	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	72	0.03	90	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).