Duchoud 2007

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		58	0.27	57	0.00	62	0.05	57	0.05	72	0.04	76	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		71	0.20	59	0.00	70	0.04	68	0.04	42	0.11	55	0.07
Ashkenazy 1981		27	0.39	80	0.00	41	0.08	35	0.24	62	0.06	48	0.12
Bacha 2000		80	0.13	43	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	72	0.04	72	0.04
Badura 1965		69	0.21	45	0.00	52	0.05	58	0.05	40	0.14	51	0.08
Barbosa 1983		55	0.27	72	0.00	60	0.05	62	0.05	61	0.05	65	0.05
Biret 1990		11	0.44	61	0.00	23	0.07	22	0.46	7	0.71	10	0.57
Blet 2003		39	0.36	62	0.00	31	0.07	30	0.35	35	0.38	28	0.36
Block 1995		65	0.24	83	0.00	61	0.04	73	0.04	83	0.03	84	0.03
Blumental 1952		77	0.16	84	0.00	79	0.03	80	0.03	78	0.03	85	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		63	0.24	50	0.00	47	0.07	50	0.07	60	0.06	60	0.06
Brailowsky 1960		73	0.19	68	0.00	73	0.04	71	0.04	73	0.04	74	0.04
Bunin 1987		37	0.37	28	0.00	14	0.11	18	0.52	10	0.57	12	0.54
Bunin 1987b		31	0.37	8	0.02	13	0.12	15	0.52	10	0.57	11	0.54
Chiu 1999		2	0.55	2	0.22	2	0.26	2	0.79	2	0.76	2	0.77
Cohen 1997		57	0.27	15	0.00	64	0.05	60	0.05	54	0.06	68	0.05
Cortot 1951		68	0.22	85	0.00	72	0.06	55	0.06	55	0.05	69	0.05
Csalog 1996		3	0.50	1	0.22	1	0.22	3	0.75	1	0.79	3	0.77
Czerny 1949		72	0.20	67	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	51	0.07	66	0.05
Czerny 1990		5	0.47	27	0.00	17	0.13	10	0.58	19	0.70	7	0.64
Duchoud 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ezaki 2006		78	0.16	16	0.00	76	0.03	77	0.03	71	0.03	78	0.03
Falvay 1989		18	0.41	9	0.02	18	0.12	23	0.46	5	0.54	16	0.50
Farrell 1958		4	0.48	7	0.03	7	0.14	11	0.56	2	0.74	6	0.64
Ferenczy 1958		86	0.00	75	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	65	0.04	82	0.03
Fliere 1977		15	0.42	60	0.00	16	0.15	7	0.60	35	0.45	13	0.52
Fou 1978		50	0.31	66	0.00	54	0.05	64	0.05	56	0.05	63	0.05
Francois 1956		62	0.25	13	0.01	67	0.05	65	0.05	44	0.12	52	0.08
Friedman 1923		32	0.37	81	0.00	28	0.07	25	0.41	33	0.43	23	0.42
Friedman 1923b		28	0.38	48	0.00	26	0.09	19	0.48	30	0.50	18	0.49
Friedman 1930		25	0.39	58	0.00	25	0.08	20	0.47	34	0.42	21	0.44
Garcia 2007		53	0.28	54	0.00	55	0.05	63	0.05	45	0.06	67	0.05
Garcia 2007b		54	0.28	76	0.00	50	0.05	56	0.05	44	0.12	53	0.08
Gierzod 1998		87	-0.01	86	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	78	0.02	87	0.02
Gornostaeva 1994		46	0.31	46	0.00	49	0.07	49	0.07	30	0.39	42	0.17
Groot 1988		13	0.43	18	0.00	21	0.09	17	0.52	34	0.24	31	0.35
Harasiewicz 1955		45	0.31	77	0.00	51	0.06	54	0.06	49	0.06	61	0.06
Hatto 1993		12	0.44	17	0.00	9	0.14	24	0.45	28	0.32	27	0.38
Hatto 1997		30	0.38	24	0.00	36	0.08	36	0.23	28	0.27	34	0.25
Horowitz 1949		36	0.37	51	0.00	42	0.08	38	0.21	35	0.32	33	0.26
Indjic 1988		19	0.41	73	0.00	22	0.10	27	0.39	32	0.32	30	0.35
Kapell 1951		14	0.43	32	0.00	19	0.15	12	0.55	15	0.46	17	0.50
Kissin 1993		51	0.29	14	0.00	27	0.08	32	0.32	33	0.45	26	0.38
Kushner 1989		17	0.41	4	0.08	4	0.15	9	0.59	15	0.55	9	0.57
Luisada 1991		21	0.40	36	0.00	30	0.08	31	0.33	42	0.23	32	0.28
Lushtak 2004		48	0.31	87	0.00	58	0.07	51	0.07	27	0.21	47	0.12
Malcuzynski 1961		76	0.17	55	0.00	74	0.04	66	0.04	75	0.03	79	0.03
Magaloff 1978		66	0.24	40	0.00	53	0.04	67	0.04	51	0.06	62	0.05
Magin 1975		43	0.32	25	0.00	39	0.07	42	0.16	37	0.30	38	0.22
Michalowski 1933		34	0.37	64	0.00	24	0.07	21	0.46	20	0.47	19	0.46
Milkina 1970		47	0.31	82	0.00	48	0.08	45	0.08	27	0.39	41	0.18
Mohovich 1999		75	0.18	78	0.00	77	0.03	76	0.03	62	0.05	77	0.04
Moravec 1969		26	0.39	35	0.00	32	0.08	29	0.35	19	0.41	24	0.38
Morozova 2008		20	0.40	44	0.00	20	0.08	16	0.52	21	0.38	20	0.44
Neighaus 1950		9	0.45	31	0.00	8	0.14	14	0.53	25	0.35	22	0.43
Niedzielski 1931		40	0.34	63	0.00	35	0.08	34	0.26	36	0.22	35	0.24
Ohlsson 1999		16	0.42	5	0.05	6	0.11	28	0.38	26	0.32	29	0.35
Osinska 1989		49	0.31	20	0.00	29	0.07	40	0.19	36	0.29	36	0.23
Pachmann 1927		52	0.28	52	0.00	56	0.06	53	0.06	49	0.07	57	0.06
Paderewski 1930		74	0.19	69	0.00	66	0.04	70	0.04	63	0.06	64	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		70	0.20	70	0.00	65	0.05	61	0.05	64	0.04	73	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		23	0.40	22	0.00	34	0.07	33	0.28	16	0.51	25	0.38
Poblocka 1999		10	0.44	33	0.00	15	0.12	6	0.63	10	0.56	8	0.59
Rabcewiczowa 1932		67	0.22	74	0.00	78	0.03	78	0.03	64	0.05	75	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		7	0.46	10	0.01	10	0.14	5	0.67	10	0.70	5	0.68
Rangell 2001		41	0.34	30	0.00	44	0.08	43	0.15	32	0.26	39	0.20
Richter 1976		6	0.47	47	0.00	5	0.13	4	0.70	22	0.71	4	0.70
Rosen 1989		24	0.40	37	0.00	12	0.11	13	0.55	21	0.50	14	0.52
Rosenthal 1930		64	0.24	41	0.00	68	0.04	72	0.04	45	0.09	59	0.06
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.03	88	0.00	87	0.03	82	0.03	69	0.03	80	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.04	89	0.00	86	0.02	84	0.02	68	0.04	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		79	0.16	11	0.01	71	0.04	69	0.04	46	0.06	70	0.05
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.02	71	0.00	85	0.02	89	0.02	73	0.03	90	0.02
Rossi 2007		82	0.09	56	0.00	81	0.03	81	0.03	38	0.12	56	0.06
Rubinstein 1939		38	0.37	53	0.00	40	0.07	41	0.19	23	0.28	37	0.23
Rubinstein 1952		60	0.26	49	0.00	63	0.05	59	0.05	58	0.05	71	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		29	0.38	12	0.01	45	0.08	47	0.08	71	0.04	58	0.06
Schilhawsky 1960		81	0.10	90	0.00	82	0.02	83	0.02	66	0.04	81	0.03
Shebanova 2002		8	0.46	6	0.04	11	0.18	8	0.60	35	0.44	15	0.51
Smith 1975		59	0.26	42	0.00	69	0.04	74	0.04	42	0.14	54	0.07
Sokolov 2002		56	0.27	39	0.00	59	0.06	52	0.06	43	0.15	49	0.09
Sztompka 1959		35	0.37	29	0.00	43	0.09	37	0.21	49	0.07	46	0.12
Tomsic 1995		61	0.26	19	0.00	37	0.07	39	0.19	39	0.13	43	0.16
Uninsky 1932		22	0.40	26	0.00	33	0.09	26	0.40	45	0.09	40	0.19
Uninsky 1971		44	0.32	21	0.00	38	0.06	44	0.15	38	0.17	44	0.16
Wasowski 1980		1	0.57	3	0.20	3	0.46	1	0.82	2	0.79	1	0.80
Zak 1937		33	0.37	34	0.00	46	0.08	46	0.08	34	0.27	45	0.15
Zak 1951		42	0.33	38	0.00	57	0.07	48	0.07	44	0.11	50	0.09
Random 1		89	-0.04	79	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	73	0.03	88	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.08	23	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	52	0.05	83	0.03
Random 3		88	-0.03	65	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	66	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).