Blumental 1952

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		23	0.34	39	0.00	24	0.11	20	0.50	27	0.38	20	0.44
Anderszewski 2003		10	0.39	21	0.01	12	0.20	9	0.64	4	0.70	2	0.67
Ashkenazy 1981		2	0.47	9	0.01	2	0.17	2	0.76	27	0.54	5	0.64
Bacha 2000		1	0.49	1	0.39	1	0.39	1	0.79	2	0.75	1	0.77
Badura 1965		17	0.36	10	0.01	17	0.11	13	0.56	7	0.61	9	0.58
Barbosa 1983		25	0.34	50	0.00	43	0.06	42	0.13	63	0.05	47	0.08
Biret 1990		84	0.06	81	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	83	0.02	88	0.02
Blet 2003		61	0.21	59	0.00	64	0.04	72	0.04	65	0.05	74	0.04
Block 1995		37	0.29	13	0.01	27	0.09	26	0.41	42	0.14	30	0.24
Blumental 1952		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Boshniakovich 1969		44	0.27	17	0.01	44	0.05	44	0.10	64	0.05	49	0.07
Brailowsky 1960		26	0.32	12	0.01	19	0.10	18	0.53	13	0.59	12	0.56
Bunin 1987		56	0.23	34	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.13	49	0.07	43	0.10
Bunin 1987b		54	0.24	19	0.01	40	0.07	39	0.16	59	0.05	45	0.09
Chiu 1999		19	0.36	54	0.00	33	0.08	34	0.28	60	0.06	34	0.13
Cohen 1997		58	0.22	56	0.00	70	0.05	63	0.05	45	0.11	50	0.07
Cortot 1951		80	0.11	87	0.00	82	0.03	75	0.03	77	0.03	84	0.03
Csalog 1996		85	0.05	70	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	80	0.03	85	0.02
Czerny 1949		81	0.09	75	0.00	73	0.03	83	0.03	44	0.11	54	0.06
Czerny 1990		18	0.36	30	0.00	15	0.11	12	0.57	24	0.60	10	0.58
Duchoud 2007		72	0.16	88	0.00	81	0.03	78	0.03	80	0.03	80	0.03
Ezaki 2006		41	0.28	47	0.00	49	0.05	62	0.05	36	0.24	38	0.11
Falvay 1989		33	0.31	42	0.00	42	0.05	43	0.12	32	0.25	33	0.17
Farrell 1958		82	0.09	37	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		65	0.20	29	0.00	47	0.06	51	0.06	26	0.65	32	0.20
Fliere 1977		27	0.32	35	0.00	34	0.08	30	0.30	74	0.04	39	0.11
Fou 1978		7	0.41	3	0.07	3	0.23	5	0.71	8	0.62	3	0.66
Francois 1956		83	0.07	76	0.00	83	0.05	59	0.05	72	0.03	76	0.04
Friedman 1923		60	0.21	77	0.00	68	0.04	71	0.04	55	0.08	58	0.06
Friedman 1923b		64	0.20	68	0.00	69	0.06	49	0.06	63	0.06	56	0.06
Friedman 1930		47	0.26	31	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.19	57	0.06	41	0.11
Garcia 2007		45	0.26	25	0.00	46	0.05	56	0.05	57	0.05	64	0.05
Garcia 2007b		21	0.35	51	0.00	20	0.10	19	0.50	22	0.52	16	0.51
Gierzod 1998		20	0.35	20	0.01	10	0.13	11	0.58	10	0.68	7	0.63
Gornostaeva 1994		76	0.15	78	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	69	0.03	82	0.03
Groot 1988		28	0.32	41	0.00	35	0.10	31	0.30	63	0.06	36	0.13
Harasiewicz 1955		32	0.31	44	0.00	37	0.06	36	0.21	51	0.06	42	0.11
Hatto 1993		5	0.44	5	0.03	7	0.19	6	0.71	24	0.46	11	0.57
Hatto 1997		12	0.38	36	0.00	13	0.10	10	0.60	19	0.43	15	0.51
Horowitz 1949		34	0.30	48	0.00	30	0.09	29	0.31	39	0.28	26	0.29
Indjic 1988		4	0.46	14	0.01	6	0.12	4	0.72	21	0.56	6	0.63
Kapell 1951		16	0.37	4	0.06	14	0.11	14	0.56	22	0.39	19	0.47
Kissin 1993		13	0.38	46	0.00	21	0.11	17	0.55	34	0.44	17	0.49
Kushner 1989		3	0.46	16	0.01	5	0.19	3	0.72	11	0.58	4	0.65
Luisada 1991		36	0.30	62	0.00	52	0.05	54	0.05	53	0.07	51	0.06
Lushtak 2004		43	0.27	40	0.00	50	0.06	48	0.06	36	0.15	46	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		6	0.42	2	0.14	4	0.19	8	0.64	17	0.53	8	0.58
Magaloff 1978		71	0.18	65	0.00	67	0.04	74	0.04	70	0.04	68	0.04
Magin 1975		15	0.37	11	0.01	16	0.09	25	0.41	32	0.44	23	0.42
Michalowski 1933		46	0.26	18	0.01	39	0.07	38	0.17	51	0.07	40	0.11
Milkina 1970		52	0.24	53	0.00	57	0.04	66	0.04	48	0.08	52	0.06
Mohovich 1999		55	0.23	26	0.00	58	0.04	67	0.04	52	0.06	66	0.05
Moravec 1969		22	0.34	27	0.00	18	0.11	21	0.50	23	0.36	22	0.42
Morozova 2008		24	0.34	6	0.03	22	0.10	27	0.35	58	0.05	35	0.13
Neighaus 1950		75	0.15	49	0.00	75	0.04	73	0.04	80	0.03	83	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		30	0.32	22	0.01	25	0.09	23	0.45	39	0.18	27	0.28
Ohlsson 1999		57	0.22	66	0.00	63	0.07	46	0.07	80	0.03	63	0.05
Osinska 1989		86	0.02	85	0.00	87	0.02	85	0.02	88	0.01	89	0.01
Pachmann 1927		73	0.16	82	0.00	76	0.03	76	0.03	65	0.05	73	0.04
Paderewski 1930		48	0.26	61	0.00	56	0.04	70	0.04	56	0.06	62	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		39	0.29	33	0.00	51	0.06	52	0.06	48	0.05	59	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		79	0.12	71	0.00	72	0.05	58	0.05	70	0.03	70	0.04
Poblocka 1999		53	0.24	55	0.00	55	0.04	69	0.04	51	0.05	67	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		78	0.12	67	0.00	77	0.03	84	0.03	55	0.06	71	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		77	0.14	45	0.00	48	0.05	61	0.05	59	0.04	69	0.04
Rangell 2001		70	0.18	79	0.00	78	0.03	79	0.03	83	0.02	87	0.02
Richter 1976		40	0.28	72	0.00	53	0.05	60	0.05	66	0.05	61	0.05
Rosen 1989		67	0.19	89	0.00	65	0.05	55	0.05	81	0.03	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		63	0.21	38	0.00	54	0.05	65	0.05	48	0.06	65	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		35	0.30	73	0.00	26	0.10	24	0.42	21	0.58	18	0.49
Rosenthal 1931b		50	0.25	32	0.00	28	0.08	35	0.25	23	0.52	25	0.36
Rosenthal 1931c		66	0.19	86	0.00	59	0.05	57	0.05	40	0.20	44	0.10
Rosenthal 1931d		68	0.18	80	0.00	36	0.08	40	0.15	23	0.42	29	0.25
Rossi 2007		90	-0.11	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.01	90	0.01
Rubinstein 1939		29	0.32	57	0.00	32	0.08	32	0.29	31	0.19	31	0.23
Rubinstein 1952		62	0.21	60	0.00	62	0.07	45	0.07	52	0.05	57	0.06
Rubinstein 1966		8	0.41	7	0.02	9	0.12	15	0.56	13	0.47	14	0.51
Schilhawsky 1960		31	0.31	28	0.00	31	0.11	28	0.33	10	0.57	21	0.43
Shebanova 2002		11	0.39	8	0.02	8	0.14	16	0.56	41	0.25	24	0.37
Smith 1975		69	0.18	24	0.01	71	0.05	64	0.05	62	0.05	60	0.05
Sokolov 2002		59	0.21	74	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	76	0.03	78	0.03
Sztompka 1959		38	0.29	43	0.00	29	0.07	33	0.29	61	0.05	37	0.12
Tomsic 1995		42	0.28	52	0.00	45	0.06	50	0.06	47	0.06	53	0.06
Uninsky 1932		14	0.37	23	0.01	23	0.14	22	0.49	44	0.14	28	0.26
Uninsky 1971		9	0.41	15	0.01	11	0.15	7	0.65	10	0.48	13	0.56
Wasowski 1980		74	0.16	63	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	79	0.04	77	0.03
Zak 1937		51	0.24	83	0.00	61	0.06	47	0.06	45	0.09	48	0.07
Zak 1951		49	0.26	64	0.00	60	0.05	53	0.05	64	0.04	72	0.04
Random 1		88	-0.07	58	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	62	0.04	81	0.03
Random 2		87	0.01	69	0.00	84	0.03	77	0.03	40	0.14	55	0.06
Random 3		89	-0.09	84	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	49	0.04	86	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).