Rosenthal 1931d

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		64	0.37	32	0.00	77	0.02	85	0.02	84	0.02	84	0.02
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.48	33	0.00	18	0.07	34	0.14	43	0.10	25	0.12
Ashkenazy 1981		49	0.45	14	0.00	53	0.05	57	0.05	81	0.03	58	0.04
Bacha 2000		30	0.53	65	0.00	54	0.05	58	0.05	63	0.04	53	0.04
Badura 1965		77	0.26	60	0.00	69	0.05	52	0.05	83	0.02	72	0.03
Barbosa 1983		79	0.25	19	0.00	76	0.02	80	0.02	90	0.01	90	0.01
Biret 1990		42	0.47	13	0.00	58	0.05	50	0.05	83	0.02	75	0.03
Blet 2003		65	0.37	77	0.00	75	0.02	82	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.02
Block 1995		10	0.64	66	0.00	12	0.10	19	0.34	21	0.28	10	0.31
Blumental 1952		85	0.18	67	0.00	82	0.02	86	0.02	80	0.02	86	0.02
Boshniakovich 1969		28	0.53	78	0.00	23	0.09	20	0.34	47	0.06	21	0.14
Brailowsky 1960		5	0.72	43	0.00	5	0.35	5	0.55	4	0.52	5	0.53
Bunin 1987		36	0.49	51	0.00	51	0.06	46	0.06	46	0.05	52	0.05
Bunin 1987b		37	0.49	44	0.00	50	0.05	48	0.05	46	0.05	47	0.05
Chiu 1999		68	0.34	79	0.00	44	0.05	42	0.10	66	0.04	45	0.06
Cohen 1997		55	0.42	80	0.00	38	0.06	33	0.14	13	0.41	17	0.24
Cortot 1951		72	0.31	36	0.00	85	0.02	83	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.02
Csalog 1996		70	0.34	81	0.00	78	0.02	76	0.02	57	0.05	70	0.03
Czerny 1949		67	0.34	16	0.00	71	0.03	67	0.03	82	0.02	83	0.02
Czerny 1990		60	0.40	34	0.00	70	0.03	69	0.03	78	0.03	74	0.03
Duchoud 2007		59	0.40	61	0.00	74	0.02	81	0.02	84	0.02	85	0.02
Ezaki 2006		33	0.51	10	0.00	47	0.04	63	0.04	68	0.03	61	0.03
Falvay 1989		17	0.59	56	0.00	13	0.08	17	0.35	74	0.03	30	0.10
Farrell 1958		21	0.55	27	0.00	37	0.04	43	0.10	41	0.11	31	0.10
Ferenczy 1958		71	0.31	37	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	87	0.02	82	0.02
Fliere 1977		13	0.63	57	0.00	21	0.09	13	0.37	65	0.04	23	0.12
Fou 1978		16	0.61	4	0.01	8	0.10	7	0.46	27	0.34	7	0.40
Francois 1956		39	0.49	7	0.00	46	0.05	53	0.05	78	0.03	59	0.04
Friedman 1923		89	0.03	62	0.00	84	0.02	77	0.02	48	0.07	60	0.04
Friedman 1923b		86	0.05	52	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	62	0.05	73	0.03
Friedman 1930		82	0.19	68	0.00	65	0.03	66	0.03	62	0.05	57	0.04
Garcia 2007		63	0.38	53	0.00	57	0.05	54	0.05	48	0.05	51	0.05
Garcia 2007b		81	0.21	28	0.00	56	0.05	55	0.05	26	0.17	36	0.09
Gierzod 1998		26	0.54	45	0.00	36	0.05	37	0.13	69	0.03	46	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		12	0.64	8	0.00	14	0.08	14	0.36	39	0.17	15	0.25
Groot 1988		7	0.65	46	0.00	7	0.09	8	0.45	37	0.16	12	0.27
Harasiewicz 1955		45	0.46	82	0.00	15	0.09	15	0.36	45	0.07	20	0.16
Hatto 1993		75	0.28	18	0.00	60	0.05	51	0.05	76	0.02	76	0.03
Hatto 1997		73	0.30	6	0.00	39	0.04	35	0.14	80	0.02	50	0.05
Horowitz 1949		18	0.58	69	0.00	11	0.08	10	0.41	20	0.32	8	0.36
Indjic 1988		74	0.28	20	0.00	59	0.04	59	0.04	81	0.02	69	0.03
Kapell 1951		61	0.39	58	0.00	73	0.02	79	0.02	84	0.02	79	0.02
Kissin 1993		23	0.55	83	0.00	24	0.07	23	0.32	65	0.04	28	0.11
Kushner 1989		15	0.62	84	0.00	22	0.07	25	0.27	68	0.03	34	0.09
Luisada 1991		34	0.51	54	0.00	48	0.05	56	0.05	56	0.04	54	0.04
Lushtak 2004		66	0.35	47	0.00	40	0.04	45	0.08	44	0.09	37	0.08
Malcuzynski 1961		9	0.64	21	0.00	20	0.06	22	0.32	66	0.04	27	0.11
Magaloff 1978		4	0.76	5	0.00	4	0.41	4	0.66	8	0.46	4	0.55
Magin 1975		22	0.55	85	0.00	25	0.10	24	0.30	37	0.15	19	0.21
Michalowski 1933		87	0.05	48	0.00	86	0.02	78	0.02	76	0.03	80	0.02
Milkina 1970		11	0.64	23	0.00	6	0.09	11	0.41	29	0.25	9	0.32
Mohovich 1999		19	0.57	24	0.00	26	0.06	18	0.35	70	0.03	33	0.10
Moravec 1969		47	0.46	26	0.00	66	0.03	71	0.03	77	0.03	62	0.03
Morozova 2008		62	0.38	86	0.00	42	0.04	39	0.11	61	0.04	43	0.07
Neighaus 1950		29	0.53	29	0.00	35	0.06	29	0.19	80	0.03	39	0.08
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.43	87	0.00	55	0.05	47	0.05	59	0.04	56	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		52	0.44	70	0.00	67	0.03	70	0.03	73	0.03	67	0.03
Osinska 1989		51	0.45	38	0.00	62	0.04	62	0.04	69	0.04	55	0.04
Pachmann 1927		53	0.44	71	0.00	31	0.06	27	0.26	29	0.27	14	0.26
Paderewski 1930		50	0.45	63	0.00	63	0.03	68	0.03	71	0.03	66	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		46	0.46	64	0.00	43	0.04	38	0.13	78	0.03	44	0.06
Pierdomenico 2008		25	0.55	39	0.00	16	0.07	21	0.33	30	0.21	13	0.26
Poblocka 1999		56	0.42	30	0.00	79	0.03	74	0.03	86	0.03	63	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		78	0.25	40	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	88	0.02	78	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		44	0.47	88	0.00	34	0.05	32	0.16	75	0.03	40	0.07
Rangell 2001		14	0.62	22	0.00	9	0.09	16	0.36	36	0.17	16	0.25
Richter 1976		32	0.51	49	0.00	32	0.06	30	0.18	48	0.05	35	0.09
Rosen 1989		20	0.55	9	0.00	29	0.06	31	0.17	58	0.04	38	0.08
Rosenthal 1930		6	0.67	11	0.00	17	0.07	9	0.44	20	0.41	6	0.42
Rosenthal 1931		2	0.92	2	0.04	2	0.84	2	0.92	2	0.93	2	0.92
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.96	1	0.91	1	0.90	1	0.96	2	0.97	1	0.96
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.79	3	0.01	3	0.32	3	0.76	3	0.78	3	0.77
Rosenthal 1931d		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rossi 2007		80	0.21	35	0.00	52	0.04	60	0.04	73	0.03	65	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		58	0.40	12	0.00	28	0.06	40	0.11	8	0.48	18	0.23
Rubinstein 1952		24	0.55	55	0.00	27	0.07	26	0.27	27	0.31	11	0.29
Rubinstein 1966		43	0.47	72	0.00	49	0.05	49	0.05	60	0.05	49	0.05
Schilhawsky 1960		40	0.49	31	0.00	41	0.05	41	0.10	53	0.05	42	0.07
Shebanova 2002		57	0.41	73	0.00	68	0.04	61	0.04	76	0.03	71	0.03
Smith 1975		27	0.53	15	0.00	19	0.08	12	0.38	58	0.04	24	0.12
Sokolov 2002		48	0.46	41	0.00	64	0.04	64	0.04	86	0.02	64	0.03
Sztompka 1959		83	0.19	74	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	86	0.02	89	0.01
Tomsic 1995		38	0.49	25	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.09	85	0.03	48	0.05
Uninsky 1932		84	0.18	75	0.00	90	0.01	89	0.01	86	0.02	91	0.01
Uninsky 1971		69	0.34	50	0.00	80	0.03	75	0.03	78	0.03	68	0.03
Wasowski 1980		76	0.27	89	0.00	81	0.03	72	0.03	87	0.02	77	0.02
Zak 1937		35	0.50	59	0.00	33	0.06	36	0.13	69	0.04	41	0.07
Zak 1951		31	0.51	90	0.00	30	0.06	28	0.24	73	0.04	32	0.10
Average		8	0.65	17	0.00	10	0.08	6	0.47	78	0.03	26	0.12
Random 1		88	0.03	91	0.00	61	0.04	65	0.04	12	0.41	22	0.13
Random 2		91	-0.01	42	0.00	72	0.03	73	0.03	12	0.37	29	0.11
Random 3		90	0.01	76	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	65	0.04	87	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).