Friedman 1923

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		57	0.26	11	0.00	60	0.06	60	0.06	73	0.04	61	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		76	0.13	29	0.00	77	0.03	75	0.03	78	0.03	75	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		13	0.50	30	0.00	13	0.10	10	0.72	24	0.59	15	0.65
Bacha 2000		77	0.12	12	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	69	0.04	72	0.03
Badura 1965		46	0.35	31	0.00	48	0.10	46	0.10	18	0.49	44	0.22
Barbosa 1983		55	0.28	32	0.00	59	0.07	57	0.07	52	0.06	57	0.06
Biret 1990		69	0.16	33	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	46	0.09	59	0.06
Blet 2003		15	0.48	5	0.00	20	0.16	22	0.54	9	0.65	20	0.59
Block 1995		17	0.47	34	0.00	25	0.07	26	0.51	23	0.48	30	0.49
Blumental 1952		64	0.21	35	0.00	63	0.08	55	0.08	71	0.04	58	0.06
Boshniakovich 1969		25	0.43	36	0.00	26	0.08	19	0.59	24	0.49	24	0.54
Brailowsky 1960		56	0.27	37	0.00	53	0.07	59	0.07	41	0.19	49	0.12
Bunin 1987		38	0.38	38	0.00	33	0.09	31	0.47	13	0.55	27	0.51
Bunin 1987b		37	0.39	39	0.00	31	0.08	29	0.49	12	0.56	26	0.52
Chiu 1999		9	0.53	40	0.00	8	0.24	6	0.78	6	0.73	6	0.75
Cohen 1997		68	0.16	41	0.00	80	0.04	73	0.04	88	0.01	86	0.02
Cortot 1951		60	0.24	42	0.00	62	0.07	58	0.07	63	0.04	62	0.05
Csalog 1996		23	0.45	43	0.00	30	0.08	28	0.50	6	0.64	22	0.57
Czerny 1949		87	-0.05	44	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	86	0.02	84	0.02
Czerny 1990		47	0.34	13	0.00	42	0.12	41	0.28	31	0.44	38	0.35
Duchoud 2007		39	0.37	45	0.00	36	0.09	33	0.43	25	0.41	34	0.42
Ezaki 2006		70	0.16	14	0.00	74	0.03	83	0.03	68	0.04	71	0.03
Falvay 1989		81	0.10	46	0.00	68	0.04	72	0.04	85	0.02	73	0.03
Farrell 1958		48	0.34	47	0.00	32	0.08	39	0.35	12	0.52	32	0.43
Ferenczy 1958		90	-0.12	48	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	86	0.02	89	0.01
Fliere 1977		3	0.67	15	0.00	3	0.49	3	0.87	4	0.84	3	0.85
Fou 1978		44	0.35	49	0.00	41	0.08	42	0.28	34	0.26	42	0.27
Francois 1956		79	0.11	50	0.00	81	0.04	71	0.04	85	0.02	78	0.03
Friedman 1923		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1923b		1	0.99	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Friedman 1930		2	0.73	16	0.00	2	0.75	2	0.90	1	0.93	2	0.91
Garcia 2007		33	0.41	51	0.00	23	0.08	25	0.53	15	0.53	25	0.53
Garcia 2007b		54	0.28	17	0.00	49	0.10	47	0.10	39	0.22	48	0.15
Gierzod 1998		72	0.15	52	0.00	78	0.05	65	0.05	69	0.04	67	0.04
Gornostaeva 1994		71	0.15	53	0.00	67	0.03	78	0.03	87	0.02	87	0.02
Groot 1988		30	0.42	18	0.00	37	0.11	32	0.44	39	0.20	40	0.30
Harasiewicz 1955		32	0.41	19	0.00	47	0.10	48	0.10	59	0.05	56	0.07
Hatto 1993		49	0.32	54	0.00	50	0.12	45	0.12	59	0.07	51	0.09
Hatto 1997		74	0.14	55	0.00	73	0.03	82	0.03	73	0.04	76	0.03
Horowitz 1949		18	0.47	56	0.00	16	0.13	13	0.69	5	0.75	9	0.72
Indjic 1988		51	0.30	20	0.00	51	0.09	49	0.09	55	0.07	53	0.08
Kapell 1951		40	0.37	57	0.00	35	0.08	38	0.36	33	0.23	41	0.29
Kissin 1993		24	0.43	6	0.00	28	0.09	23	0.53	18	0.62	21	0.57
Kushner 1989		42	0.36	58	0.00	46	0.08	53	0.08	46	0.09	52	0.08
Luisada 1991		27	0.43	59	0.00	40	0.13	37	0.37	40	0.26	39	0.31
Lushtak 2004		52	0.29	60	0.00	54	0.09	50	0.09	41	0.11	50	0.10
Malcuzynski 1961		34	0.40	7	0.00	44	0.09	44	0.18	35	0.20	45	0.19
Magaloff 1978		8	0.54	3	0.00	9	0.25	7	0.77	6	0.73	7	0.75
Magin 1975		43	0.36	21	0.00	29	0.09	40	0.32	25	0.50	36	0.40
Michalowski 1933		20	0.46	61	0.00	19	0.13	30	0.49	15	0.50	29	0.49
Milkina 1970		85	0.00	62	0.00	85	0.03	76	0.03	87	0.02	82	0.02
Mohovich 1999		63	0.22	63	0.00	65	0.05	67	0.05	79	0.03	68	0.04
Moravec 1969		53	0.28	64	0.00	57	0.06	63	0.06	79	0.03	64	0.04
Morozova 2008		31	0.42	65	0.00	21	0.13	27	0.51	18	0.42	31	0.46
Neighaus 1950		28	0.43	66	0.00	24	0.07	21	0.55	31	0.30	35	0.41
Niedzielski 1931		22	0.46	9	0.00	11	0.11	20	0.56	15	0.54	23	0.55
Ohlsson 1999		11	0.50	67	0.00	14	0.12	17	0.66	9	0.61	18	0.63
Osinska 1989		50	0.31	68	0.00	55	0.08	54	0.08	54	0.06	54	0.07
Pachmann 1927		4	0.61	4	0.00	4	0.27	5	0.78	4	0.84	4	0.81
Paderewski 1930		26	0.43	2	0.00	34	0.08	34	0.43	20	0.55	28	0.49
Perlemuter 1992		16	0.48	69	0.00	22	0.09	18	0.60	9	0.68	16	0.64
Pierdomenico 2008		36	0.39	22	0.00	45	0.09	51	0.09	26	0.32	47	0.17
Poblocka 1999		35	0.39	23	0.00	39	0.12	35	0.39	22	0.39	37	0.39
Rabcewiczowa 1932		84	0.02	70	0.00	86	0.03	81	0.03	88	0.01	81	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		19	0.47	24	0.00	12	0.11	16	0.67	11	0.70	13	0.68
Rangell 2001		45	0.35	25	0.00	43	0.10	43	0.20	22	0.35	43	0.26
Richter 1976		6	0.58	71	0.00	6	0.26	4	0.79	10	0.80	5	0.79
Rosen 1989		12	0.50	72	0.00	15	0.12	12	0.71	11	0.64	14	0.67
Rosenthal 1930		59	0.26	73	0.00	64	0.08	52	0.08	52	0.06	55	0.07
Rosenthal 1931		83	0.08	74	0.00	79	0.04	74	0.04	67	0.03	74	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.13	75	0.00	71	0.05	66	0.05	58	0.04	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		66	0.19	76	0.00	56	0.06	62	0.06	58	0.04	63	0.05
Rosenthal 1931d		80	0.11	77	0.00	66	0.04	70	0.04	52	0.05	69	0.04
Rossi 2007		65	0.20	78	0.00	58	0.06	64	0.06	10	0.55	46	0.18
Rubinstein 1939		82	0.09	79	0.00	82	0.03	77	0.03	86	0.02	80	0.02
Rubinstein 1952		67	0.18	80	0.00	72	0.03	86	0.03	87	0.02	88	0.02
Rubinstein 1966		62	0.22	81	0.00	70	0.05	68	0.05	83	0.03	66	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.37	26	0.00	38	0.13	36	0.37	16	0.48	33	0.42
Shebanova 2002		5	0.58	82	0.00	5	0.32	9	0.76	13	0.68	10	0.72
Smith 1975		78	0.12	83	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	87	0.02	79	0.02
Sokolov 2002		61	0.23	27	0.00	61	0.07	56	0.07	66	0.03	60	0.05
Sztompka 1959		14	0.48	84	0.00	17	0.11	15	0.67	11	0.60	17	0.63
Tomsic 1995		73	0.15	85	0.00	75	0.03	80	0.03	86	0.02	83	0.02
Uninsky 1932		7	0.54	86	0.00	7	0.28	8	0.76	7	0.73	8	0.74
Uninsky 1971		58	0.26	87	0.00	52	0.06	61	0.06	75	0.03	65	0.04
Wasowski 1980		10	0.52	8	0.00	10	0.20	11	0.71	8	0.69	12	0.70
Zak 1937		21	0.46	10	0.00	18	0.14	14	0.69	4	0.74	11	0.71
Zak 1951		29	0.42	88	0.00	27	0.08	24	0.53	5	0.68	19	0.60
Random 1		86	-0.02	89	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	50	0.04	77	0.03
Random 2		88	-0.08	90	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	79	0.03	85	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.11	28	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.01	90	0.01

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).