Rubinstein 1966

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		17	0.41	49	0.00	14	0.10	16	0.45	10	0.59	12	0.52
Anderszewski 2003		2	0.53	1	0.46	1	0.46	2	0.73	1	0.86	1	0.79
Ashkenazy 1981		34	0.36	53	0.00	34	0.05	33	0.20	53	0.07	54	0.12
Bacha 2000		39	0.35	38	0.00	35	0.05	37	0.15	16	0.50	31	0.27
Badura 1965		41	0.35	29	0.00	46	0.04	77	0.04	11	0.55	46	0.15
Barbosa 1983		3	0.50	3	0.06	4	0.16	4	0.58	4	0.68	4	0.63
Biret 1990		78	0.22	76	0.00	78	0.05	50	0.05	43	0.12	59	0.08
Blet 2003		71	0.25	81	0.00	70	0.07	45	0.07	58	0.06	66	0.06
Block 1995		18	0.41	62	0.00	25	0.07	24	0.31	31	0.38	25	0.34
Blumental 1952		19	0.41	5	0.03	15	0.10	13	0.47	15	0.56	14	0.51
Boshniakovich 1969		54	0.32	71	0.00	27	0.08	30	0.25	30	0.34	30	0.29
Brailowsky 1960		60	0.31	7	0.01	33	0.05	40	0.11	25	0.46	36	0.22
Bunin 1987		86	0.13	84	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	68	0.04	88	0.03
Bunin 1987b		85	0.13	85	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	64	0.05	78	0.04
Chiu 1999		27	0.38	65	0.00	66	0.06	47	0.06	54	0.07	63	0.06
Cohen 1997		29	0.37	48	0.00	24	0.07	28	0.26	14	0.56	24	0.38
Cortot 1951		68	0.28	86	0.00	72	0.04	72	0.04	54	0.05	83	0.04
Csalog 1996		67	0.28	23	0.01	63	0.05	56	0.05	34	0.26	56	0.11
Czerny 1949		70	0.26	72	0.00	69	0.05	52	0.05	31	0.53	44	0.16
Czerny 1990		47	0.33	73	0.00	54	0.05	58	0.05	37	0.33	51	0.13
Duchoud 2007		26	0.38	41	0.00	52	0.04	71	0.04	47	0.08	67	0.06
Ezaki 2006		46	0.33	42	0.00	56	0.05	51	0.05	31	0.32	50	0.13
Falvay 1989		36	0.35	32	0.00	28	0.08	29	0.25	21	0.37	28	0.30
Farrell 1958		62	0.30	19	0.01	42	0.05	43	0.09	35	0.27	42	0.16
Ferenczy 1958		44	0.34	28	0.00	32	0.07	31	0.25	11	0.78	18	0.44
Fliere 1977		49	0.33	74	0.00	61	0.04	69	0.04	58	0.05	74	0.04
Fou 1978		4	0.48	18	0.01	3	0.31	3	0.63	4	0.65	3	0.64
Francois 1956		45	0.33	66	0.00	36	0.06	34	0.16	17	0.61	27	0.31
Friedman 1923		76	0.22	82	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	68	0.05	85	0.04
Friedman 1923b		82	0.20	77	0.00	83	0.03	87	0.03	67	0.05	82	0.04
Friedman 1930		79	0.21	59	0.00	82	0.02	88	0.02	63	0.05	87	0.03
Garcia 2007		12	0.43	4	0.06	5	0.15	12	0.48	13	0.57	13	0.52
Garcia 2007b		84	0.16	78	0.00	74	0.03	79	0.03	54	0.06	84	0.04
Gierzod 1998		59	0.31	46	0.00	39	0.05	39	0.13	19	0.57	33	0.27
Gornostaeva 1994		32	0.37	51	0.00	45	0.04	67	0.04	24	0.53	47	0.15
Groot 1988		31	0.37	63	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.07	49	0.07	62	0.07
Harasiewicz 1955		6	0.46	50	0.00	8	0.10	8	0.49	13	0.52	16	0.50
Hatto 1993		15	0.42	20	0.01	16	0.08	22	0.36	36	0.25	29	0.30
Hatto 1997		10	0.43	16	0.01	17	0.11	17	0.43	12	0.51	17	0.47
Horowitz 1949		72	0.25	79	0.00	73	0.05	61	0.05	64	0.05	70	0.05
Indjic 1988		28	0.37	14	0.01	18	0.10	26	0.27	40	0.20	34	0.23
Kapell 1951		22	0.40	54	0.00	26	0.09	23	0.32	26	0.33	26	0.32
Kissin 1993		42	0.35	21	0.01	23	0.10	20	0.37	26	0.51	19	0.43
Kushner 1989		9	0.44	45	0.00	11	0.09	14	0.46	16	0.55	15	0.50
Luisada 1991		25	0.38	13	0.01	30	0.09	32	0.23	32	0.32	32	0.27
Lushtak 2004		7	0.45	15	0.01	6	0.15	7	0.50	7	0.59	10	0.54
Malcuzynski 1961		61	0.31	44	0.00	64	0.07	46	0.07	63	0.05	64	0.06
Magaloff 1978		69	0.27	61	0.00	62	0.04	68	0.04	52	0.05	76	0.04
Magin 1975		77	0.22	69	0.00	75	0.03	78	0.03	58	0.06	77	0.04
Michalowski 1933		75	0.23	56	0.00	77	0.05	63	0.05	61	0.06	72	0.05
Milkina 1970		13	0.42	11	0.01	7	0.09	5	0.53	4	0.72	5	0.62
Mohovich 1999		1	0.54	2	0.15	2	0.40	1	0.77	1	0.81	2	0.79
Moravec 1969		35	0.36	10	0.01	37	0.06	36	0.15	26	0.33	35	0.22
Morozova 2008		21	0.40	6	0.02	41	0.05	41	0.10	66	0.05	61	0.07
Neighaus 1950		16	0.41	9	0.01	13	0.10	9	0.48	23	0.36	20	0.42
Niedzielski 1931		43	0.34	39	0.00	38	0.06	35	0.15	29	0.27	38	0.20
Ohlsson 1999		58	0.31	12	0.01	58	0.04	70	0.04	60	0.05	80	0.04
Osinska 1989		55	0.32	47	0.00	51	0.05	62	0.05	31	0.40	49	0.14
Pachmann 1927		80	0.21	80	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	73	0.05	79	0.04
Paderewski 1930		57	0.32	67	0.00	49	0.05	65	0.05	39	0.26	55	0.11
Perlemuter 1992		50	0.33	43	0.00	57	0.06	49	0.06	41	0.26	52	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		66	0.28	35	0.00	71	0.05	54	0.05	44	0.09	60	0.07
Poblocka 1999		56	0.32	24	0.01	40	0.05	38	0.14	34	0.27	39	0.19
Rabcewiczowa 1932		20	0.41	57	0.00	19	0.08	15	0.46	12	0.72	6	0.58
Rachmaninoff 1923		65	0.29	87	0.00	67	0.05	60	0.05	48	0.05	69	0.05
Rangell 2001		8	0.44	26	0.00	9	0.08	6	0.51	5	0.62	7	0.56
Richter 1976		33	0.36	40	0.00	65	0.05	53	0.05	48	0.08	65	0.06
Rosen 1989		11	0.43	27	0.00	22	0.09	21	0.37	28	0.43	23	0.40
Rosenthal 1930		40	0.35	30	0.00	55	0.04	73	0.04	40	0.25	57	0.10
Rosenthal 1931		30	0.37	17	0.01	20	0.08	19	0.40	11	0.68	11	0.52
Rosenthal 1931b		38	0.35	52	0.00	31	0.08	25	0.27	13	0.66	21	0.42
Rosenthal 1931c		37	0.35	64	0.00	50	0.05	57	0.05	15	0.55	41	0.17
Rosenthal 1931d		74	0.24	55	0.00	60	0.05	66	0.05	21	0.45	48	0.15
Rossi 2007		87	0.05	75	0.00	87	0.03	84	0.03	48	0.05	75	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		5	0.46	8	0.01	10	0.08	11	0.48	4	0.63	8	0.55
Rubinstein 1952		14	0.42	33	0.00	12	0.10	10	0.48	6	0.64	9	0.55
Rubinstein 1966		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Schilhawsky 1960		83	0.18	70	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	51	0.05	81	0.04
Shebanova 2002		24	0.39	22	0.01	29	0.08	27	0.26	44	0.18	37	0.22
Smith 1975		52	0.33	31	0.00	53	0.05	59	0.05	22	0.46	45	0.15
Sokolov 2002		81	0.20	88	0.00	79	0.04	75	0.04	64	0.03	86	0.03
Sztompka 1959		53	0.33	68	0.00	59	0.05	64	0.05	67	0.05	71	0.05
Tomsic 1995		64	0.29	83	0.00	43	0.04	42	0.09	19	0.32	40	0.17
Uninsky 1932		63	0.30	34	0.00	68	0.05	55	0.05	57	0.06	73	0.05
Uninsky 1971		23	0.40	25	0.00	21	0.09	18	0.41	17	0.40	22	0.40
Wasowski 1980		73	0.24	60	0.00	76	0.04	74	0.04	54	0.06	68	0.05
Zak 1937		51	0.33	58	0.00	47	0.04	76	0.04	31	0.34	53	0.12
Zak 1951		48	0.33	36	0.00	48	0.06	48	0.06	23	0.42	43	0.16
Random 1		89	-0.05	89	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	79	0.02	89	0.02
Random 2		88	0.03	37	0.00	88	0.03	86	0.03	32	0.21	58	0.08
Random 3		90	-0.12	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	0.02	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).