Cortot 1951

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		67	0.16	74	0.00	58	0.04	68	0.04	88	0.02	78	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		62	0.19	63	0.00	66	0.05	60	0.05	66	0.04	64	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		70	0.16	75	0.00	76	0.03	72	0.03	77	0.04	80	0.03
Bacha 2000		43	0.24	66	0.00	38	0.08	35	0.27	59	0.05	36	0.12
Badura 1965		52	0.22	35	0.00	48	0.05	51	0.05	59	0.04	70	0.04
Barbosa 1983		72	0.15	59	0.00	70	0.02	80	0.02	72	0.04	76	0.03
Biret 1990		58	0.20	33	0.00	54	0.06	47	0.06	52	0.06	50	0.06
Blet 2003		59	0.20	64	0.00	50	0.06	49	0.06	61	0.06	48	0.06
Block 1995		9	0.41	4	0.03	6	0.17	10	0.61	32	0.38	21	0.48
Blumental 1952		81	0.11	86	0.00	73	0.03	77	0.03	75	0.03	79	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		61	0.19	13	0.01	34	0.09	34	0.30	68	0.04	38	0.11
Brailowsky 1960		18	0.34	53	0.00	21	0.09	18	0.54	17	0.54	13	0.54
Bunin 1987		79	0.12	87	0.00	79	0.03	78	0.03	77	0.03	81	0.03
Bunin 1987b		77	0.12	88	0.00	78	0.03	71	0.03	77	0.03	74	0.03
Chiu 1999		27	0.32	15	0.01	52	0.04	62	0.04	73	0.04	59	0.04
Cohen 1997		7	0.42	12	0.01	8	0.18	11	0.60	8	0.62	10	0.61
Cortot 1951		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Csalog 1996		51	0.22	9	0.01	67	0.04	65	0.04	46	0.07	54	0.05
Czerny 1949		16	0.35	31	0.00	15	0.13	15	0.57	12	0.75	8	0.65
Czerny 1990		89	0.00	68	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	87	0.02	89	0.01
Duchoud 2007		54	0.22	80	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	55	0.06	57	0.05
Ezaki 2006		8	0.42	3	0.04	5	0.26	4	0.72	20	0.61	6	0.66
Falvay 1989		39	0.25	43	0.00	47	0.06	48	0.06	60	0.04	51	0.05
Farrell 1958		25	0.33	32	0.00	27	0.07	27	0.43	26	0.37	24	0.40
Ferenczy 1958		11	0.39	16	0.01	13	0.17	12	0.59	7	0.82	3	0.70
Fliere 1977		29	0.31	69	0.00	31	0.09	28	0.41	66	0.05	32	0.14
Fou 1978		47	0.23	38	0.00	41	0.06	43	0.12	76	0.03	46	0.06
Francois 1956		22	0.34	27	0.00	14	0.14	17	0.54	19	0.58	12	0.56
Friedman 1923		42	0.24	29	0.00	59	0.04	63	0.04	58	0.07	58	0.05
Friedman 1923b		50	0.23	60	0.00	61	0.05	59	0.05	56	0.08	49	0.06
Friedman 1930		44	0.24	85	0.00	60	0.05	61	0.05	68	0.05	55	0.05
Garcia 2007		57	0.20	61	0.00	46	0.05	58	0.05	73	0.04	69	0.04
Garcia 2007b		90	-0.01	70	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	87	0.02	90	0.01
Gierzod 1998		28	0.32	22	0.00	17	0.09	19	0.53	21	0.51	18	0.52
Gornostaeva 1994		2	0.47	18	0.00	4	0.20	3	0.73	13	0.65	5	0.69
Groot 1988		64	0.17	52	0.00	57	0.03	69	0.03	80	0.03	82	0.03
Harasiewicz 1955		15	0.36	14	0.01	32	0.09	26	0.43	70	0.04	35	0.13
Hatto 1993		65	0.17	81	0.00	69	0.04	64	0.04	76	0.04	71	0.04
Hatto 1997		41	0.24	24	0.00	45	0.06	50	0.06	64	0.04	56	0.05
Horowitz 1949		86	0.07	71	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	83	0.02	86	0.02
Indjic 1988		83	0.09	76	0.00	87	0.02	85	0.02	83	0.03	88	0.02
Kapell 1951		78	0.12	82	0.00	77	0.03	70	0.03	77	0.04	73	0.03
Kissin 1993		80	0.11	37	0.00	71	0.03	79	0.03	78	0.04	75	0.03
Kushner 1989		46	0.23	67	0.00	56	0.04	66	0.04	64	0.05	63	0.04
Luisada 1991		82	0.11	50	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02	83	0.02
Lushtak 2004		32	0.29	51	0.00	37	0.08	36	0.26	40	0.11	29	0.17
Malcuzynski 1961		55	0.22	11	0.01	25	0.08	31	0.35	58	0.05	34	0.13
Magaloff 1978		14	0.36	23	0.00	12	0.15	9	0.61	28	0.40	20	0.49
Magin 1975		84	0.09	56	0.00	72	0.03	76	0.03	60	0.05	62	0.04
Michalowski 1933		74	0.14	89	0.00	83	0.02	82	0.02	81	0.03	87	0.02
Milkina 1970		63	0.17	40	0.00	55	0.05	56	0.05	49	0.07	47	0.06
Mohovich 1999		24	0.33	8	0.01	20	0.09	21	0.52	40	0.18	25	0.31
Moravec 1969		45	0.24	28	0.00	39	0.07	39	0.20	76	0.04	40	0.09
Morozova 2008		40	0.25	54	0.00	63	0.06	46	0.06	82	0.03	66	0.04
Neighaus 1950		6	0.43	5	0.03	3	0.24	7	0.66	15	0.44	14	0.54
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.13	57	0.00	68	0.04	67	0.04	72	0.04	61	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		13	0.37	10	0.01	19	0.09	22	0.52	48	0.06	28	0.18
Osinska 1989		4	0.45	7	0.02	7	0.16	6	0.68	15	0.59	9	0.63
Pachmann 1927		19	0.34	39	0.00	35	0.10	33	0.34	61	0.06	33	0.14
Paderewski 1930		37	0.27	48	0.00	29	0.09	29	0.39	44	0.21	26	0.29
Perlemuter 1992		60	0.19	83	0.00	40	0.06	40	0.16	79	0.04	42	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		31	0.29	20	0.00	36	0.08	38	0.21	50	0.06	37	0.11
Poblocka 1999		76	0.13	44	0.00	75	0.03	73	0.03	76	0.04	72	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		10	0.40	30	0.00	11	0.20	8	0.65	17	0.68	7	0.66
Rachmaninoff 1923		66	0.17	77	0.00	62	0.05	53	0.05	63	0.04	60	0.04
Rangell 2001		17	0.35	17	0.00	10	0.14	13	0.59	11	0.48	15	0.53
Richter 1976		38	0.25	78	0.00	65	0.05	57	0.05	60	0.05	53	0.05
Rosen 1989		1	0.55	1	0.40	1	0.40	1	0.79	10	0.64	2	0.71
Rosenthal 1930		23	0.34	46	0.00	23	0.10	25	0.45	30	0.40	23	0.42
Rosenthal 1931		20	0.34	45	0.00	18	0.11	20	0.52	14	0.67	11	0.59
Rosenthal 1931b		26	0.33	79	0.00	26	0.09	24	0.48	20	0.59	17	0.53
Rosenthal 1931c		5	0.43	6	0.03	9	0.21	5	0.70	6	0.70	4	0.70
Rosenthal 1931d		34	0.29	36	0.00	24	0.12	23	0.51	10	0.56	16	0.53
Rossi 2007		35	0.28	21	0.00	28	0.08	32	0.35	6	0.59	22	0.45
Rubinstein 1939		30	0.30	34	0.00	33	0.11	37	0.22	40	0.12	30	0.16
Rubinstein 1952		49	0.23	49	0.00	30	0.08	30	0.37	49	0.06	31	0.15
Rubinstein 1966		36	0.28	72	0.00	51	0.05	54	0.05	72	0.04	65	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		73	0.15	73	0.00	80	0.03	74	0.03	67	0.04	77	0.03
Shebanova 2002		56	0.22	19	0.00	64	0.05	52	0.05	76	0.04	67	0.04
Smith 1975		3	0.46	2	0.32	2	0.44	2	0.78	6	0.77	1	0.77
Sokolov 2002		21	0.34	26	0.00	22	0.10	16	0.54	17	0.45	19	0.49
Sztompka 1959		48	0.23	84	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.11	70	0.04	44	0.07
Tomsic 1995		68	0.16	65	0.00	49	0.08	45	0.08	81	0.03	52	0.05
Uninsky 1932		33	0.29	41	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.15	70	0.04	43	0.08
Uninsky 1971		12	0.37	58	0.00	16	0.10	14	0.57	41	0.15	27	0.29
Wasowski 1980		53	0.22	25	0.00	43	0.06	42	0.13	72	0.05	41	0.08
Zak 1937		71	0.15	90	0.00	85	0.02	81	0.02	83	0.03	84	0.02
Zak 1951		69	0.16	55	0.00	84	0.02	87	0.02	77	0.03	85	0.02
Random 1		85	0.07	42	0.00	81	0.02	83	0.02	23	0.28	45	0.07
Random 2		88	0.02	62	0.00	74	0.03	75	0.03	47	0.06	68	0.04
Random 3		87	0.03	47	0.00	82	0.02	84	0.02	11	0.47	39	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).