Wasowski 1980

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		68	0.23	79	0.00	67	0.05	67	0.05	71	0.04	76	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		78	0.12	55	0.00	76	0.04	81	0.04	79	0.03	80	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		20	0.49	47	0.00	25	0.09	17	0.57	30	0.50	26	0.53
Bacha 2000		80	0.06	80	0.00	80	0.05	64	0.05	80	0.02	78	0.03
Badura 1965		72	0.22	49	0.00	68	0.05	66	0.05	43	0.12	56	0.08
Barbosa 1983		47	0.32	42	0.00	42	0.08	38	0.26	25	0.39	38	0.32
Biret 1990		23	0.48	35	0.00	11	0.10	9	0.68	2	0.81	3	0.74
Blet 2003		17	0.50	8	0.03	9	0.13	20	0.55	12	0.64	18	0.59
Block 1995		50	0.31	71	0.00	61	0.05	65	0.05	53	0.05	69	0.05
Blumental 1952		75	0.16	48	0.00	75	0.04	79	0.04	81	0.03	81	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		54	0.30	81	0.00	50	0.05	60	0.05	61	0.06	70	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		81	0.04	82	0.00	81	0.04	80	0.04	82	0.03	79	0.03
Bunin 1987		31	0.42	50	0.00	33	0.13	29	0.46	18	0.50	33	0.48
Bunin 1987b		30	0.43	46	0.00	32	0.10	30	0.46	19	0.50	32	0.48
Chiu 1999		8	0.54	7	0.04	7	0.20	3	0.75	8	0.69	5	0.72
Cohen 1997		57	0.30	22	0.00	47	0.07	49	0.07	46	0.10	57	0.08
Cortot 1951		71	0.22	40	0.00	62	0.05	72	0.05	42	0.13	59	0.08
Csalog 1996		13	0.52	1	0.23	1	0.23	12	0.64	4	0.75	10	0.69
Czerny 1949		67	0.23	28	0.00	69	0.08	47	0.08	35	0.47	44	0.19
Czerny 1990		19	0.50	25	0.00	26	0.09	28	0.48	22	0.64	24	0.55
Duchoud 2007		2	0.57	4	0.09	6	0.19	2	0.79	1	0.82	1	0.80
Ezaki 2006		77	0.13	63	0.00	78	0.05	68	0.05	80	0.03	71	0.04
Falvay 1989		46	0.33	10	0.02	38	0.10	37	0.28	19	0.39	36	0.33
Farrell 1958		29	0.44	11	0.01	10	0.11	19	0.56	5	0.63	17	0.59
Ferenczy 1958		90	-0.10	83	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	76	0.03	84	0.02
Fliere 1977		16	0.50	64	0.00	24	0.10	18	0.57	30	0.50	25	0.53
Fou 1978		58	0.30	38	0.00	55	0.05	62	0.05	65	0.04	73	0.04
Francois 1956		52	0.31	84	0.00	64	0.06	57	0.06	35	0.33	49	0.14
Friedman 1923		14	0.52	58	0.00	13	0.14	8	0.69	11	0.71	9	0.70
Friedman 1923b		9	0.53	37	0.00	8	0.12	7	0.71	10	0.74	8	0.72
Friedman 1930		3	0.57	3	0.12	3	0.21	5	0.72	8	0.72	7	0.72
Garcia 2007		69	0.23	72	0.00	71	0.07	50	0.07	66	0.05	60	0.06
Garcia 2007b		36	0.39	52	0.00	46	0.08	48	0.08	28	0.41	45	0.18
Gierzod 1998		89	-0.10	73	0.00	85	0.02	84	0.02	88	0.02	86	0.02
Gornostaeva 1994		62	0.27	74	0.00	56	0.05	69	0.05	47	0.08	62	0.06
Groot 1988		5	0.55	12	0.01	18	0.12	10	0.66	10	0.59	13	0.62
Harasiewicz 1955		37	0.39	61	0.00	39	0.09	41	0.23	55	0.06	52	0.12
Hatto 1993		25	0.48	18	0.01	17	0.09	24	0.54	17	0.53	27	0.53
Hatto 1997		34	0.41	43	0.00	31	0.09	34	0.41	15	0.45	35	0.43
Horowitz 1949		10	0.53	14	0.01	23	0.11	25	0.54	10	0.71	12	0.62
Indjic 1988		22	0.49	20	0.00	16	0.08	21	0.55	18	0.58	21	0.56
Kapell 1951		12	0.52	16	0.01	19	0.13	14	0.61	9	0.59	16	0.60
Kissin 1993		33	0.42	65	0.00	30	0.12	31	0.45	21	0.58	29	0.51
Kushner 1989		45	0.33	56	0.00	57	0.05	73	0.05	61	0.05	65	0.05
Luisada 1991		18	0.50	13	0.01	21	0.19	11	0.66	11	0.66	11	0.66
Lushtak 2004		73	0.19	44	0.00	73	0.05	59	0.05	68	0.05	68	0.05
Malcuzynski 1961		59	0.30	39	0.00	63	0.05	61	0.05	69	0.04	74	0.04
Magaloff 1978		41	0.35	66	0.00	51	0.06	53	0.06	53	0.05	63	0.05
Magin 1975		27	0.46	9	0.02	15	0.09	27	0.51	16	0.66	19	0.58
Michalowski 1933		24	0.48	59	0.00	29	0.16	26	0.52	12	0.53	28	0.52
Milkina 1970		64	0.25	85	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	29	0.37	47	0.15
Mohovich 1999		82	0.04	67	0.00	84	0.03	83	0.03	86	0.02	87	0.02
Moravec 1969		28	0.46	41	0.00	27	0.11	23	0.55	6	0.68	14	0.61
Morozova 2008		55	0.30	62	0.00	48	0.06	56	0.06	78	0.04	67	0.05
Neighaus 1950		15	0.50	34	0.00	20	0.16	13	0.61	11	0.52	23	0.56
Niedzielski 1931		32	0.42	26	0.00	35	0.08	39	0.24	34	0.24	41	0.24
Ohlsson 1999		6	0.55	6	0.05	4	0.19	4	0.73	1	0.71	6	0.72
Osinska 1989		39	0.38	23	0.00	36	0.09	32	0.43	20	0.54	31	0.48
Pachmann 1927		35	0.40	51	0.00	34	0.12	33	0.42	25	0.50	34	0.46
Paderewski 1930		43	0.34	27	0.00	44	0.08	44	0.16	32	0.36	42	0.24
Perlemuter 1992		56	0.30	75	0.00	66	0.04	78	0.04	78	0.04	72	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		26	0.46	33	0.00	28	0.10	35	0.40	10	0.61	30	0.49
Poblocka 1999		40	0.36	68	0.00	41	0.09	43	0.19	25	0.38	39	0.27
Rabcewiczowa 1932		74	0.17	86	0.00	77	0.05	74	0.05	59	0.06	64	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923		21	0.49	29	0.00	14	0.13	22	0.55	15	0.67	15	0.61
Rangell 2001		51	0.31	60	0.00	54	0.06	52	0.06	43	0.10	58	0.08
Richter 1976		4	0.55	24	0.00	12	0.10	6	0.71	16	0.76	4	0.73
Rosen 1989		38	0.38	31	0.00	40	0.08	40	0.23	40	0.17	43	0.20
Rosenthal 1930		70	0.23	76	0.00	74	0.06	55	0.06	82	0.03	77	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		88	-0.09	69	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	89	0.01	90	0.01
Rosenthal 1931b		87	-0.04	87	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	88	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		79	0.11	70	0.00	79	0.05	71	0.05	82	0.02	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		84	0.00	77	0.00	82	0.03	82	0.03	85	0.02	88	0.02
Rossi 2007		76	0.13	32	0.00	72	0.05	70	0.05	23	0.31	51	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		49	0.32	19	0.00	37	0.09	36	0.28	14	0.39	37	0.33
Rubinstein 1952		42	0.34	36	0.00	45	0.09	45	0.09	36	0.19	50	0.13
Rubinstein 1966		65	0.24	53	0.00	70	0.06	54	0.06	74	0.04	66	0.05
Schilhawsky 1960		63	0.26	88	0.00	53	0.06	58	0.06	27	0.37	48	0.15
Shebanova 2002		7	0.54	5	0.08	5	0.16	16	0.58	28	0.55	22	0.56
Smith 1975		61	0.27	21	0.00	58	0.05	75	0.05	41	0.14	55	0.08
Sokolov 2002		53	0.31	30	0.00	65	0.05	63	0.05	41	0.18	53	0.09
Sztompka 1959		11	0.52	17	0.01	22	0.16	15	0.59	12	0.58	20	0.58
Tomsic 1995		44	0.33	15	0.01	43	0.10	42	0.22	22	0.31	40	0.26
Uninsky 1932		1	0.58	2	0.17	2	0.21	1	0.79	4	0.73	2	0.76
Uninsky 1971		66	0.24	89	0.00	60	0.05	77	0.05	68	0.04	75	0.04
Wasowski 1980		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Zak 1937		48	0.32	90	0.00	52	0.08	46	0.08	33	0.28	46	0.15
Zak 1951		60	0.29	57	0.00	59	0.05	76	0.05	39	0.17	54	0.09
Random 1		86	-0.01	45	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	47	0.05	82	0.03
Random 2		85	-0.01	78	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	71	0.03	85	0.02
Random 3		83	0.03	54	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	29	0.18	61	0.06

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).