Kissin 1993

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		63	0.20	53	0.00	65	0.06	64	0.06	58	0.04	69	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		66	0.17	78	0.00	64	0.05	73	0.05	52	0.06	66	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		2	0.66	4	0.06	2	0.56	2	0.90	3	0.88	2	0.89
Bacha 2000		52	0.26	42	0.00	53	0.05	69	0.05	41	0.19	48	0.10
Badura 1965		50	0.27	62	0.00	57	0.08	49	0.08	43	0.12	49	0.10
Barbosa 1983		43	0.31	43	0.00	41	0.08	44	0.28	36	0.21	40	0.24
Biret 1990		84	0.01	73	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	81	0.03	81	0.03
Blet 2003		24	0.40	39	0.00	30	0.07	24	0.52	28	0.46	24	0.49
Block 1995		18	0.43	15	0.00	17	0.26	15	0.68	18	0.56	14	0.62
Blumental 1952		26	0.38	45	0.00	26	0.09	35	0.44	18	0.55	26	0.49
Boshniakovich 1969		38	0.32	67	0.00	40	0.09	42	0.28	58	0.06	47	0.13
Brailowsky 1960		88	-0.02	54	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	88	0.02	84	0.02
Bunin 1987		58	0.22	83	0.00	60	0.08	50	0.08	61	0.05	59	0.06
Bunin 1987b		59	0.22	63	0.00	61	0.08	48	0.08	73	0.04	55	0.06
Chiu 1999		25	0.39	79	0.00	29	0.08	28	0.51	40	0.22	36	0.33
Cohen 1997		78	0.08	40	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	82	0.02	88	0.02
Cortot 1951		74	0.11	46	0.00	76	0.04	79	0.04	80	0.03	82	0.03
Csalog 1996		48	0.28	8	0.01	35	0.11	39	0.33	22	0.44	32	0.38
Czerny 1949		91	-0.10	86	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	86	0.02	91	0.01
Czerny 1990		12	0.50	10	0.01	8	0.22	7	0.79	5	0.84	4	0.81
Duchoud 2007		45	0.29	68	0.00	33	0.11	34	0.45	33	0.32	33	0.38
Ezaki 2006		75	0.11	19	0.00	75	0.05	75	0.05	65	0.04	73	0.04
Falvay 1989		47	0.28	74	0.00	42	0.10	41	0.29	37	0.21	38	0.25
Farrell 1958		71	0.14	47	0.00	69	0.07	53	0.07	50	0.06	54	0.06
Ferenczy 1958		90	-0.08	33	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	76	0.03	86	0.02
Fliere 1977		4	0.54	12	0.00	7	0.25	5	0.82	17	0.72	7	0.77
Fou 1978		22	0.42	80	0.00	18	0.18	17	0.65	13	0.53	18	0.59
Francois 1956		86	0.00	81	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	87	0.02	90	0.02
Friedman 1923		19	0.43	21	0.00	22	0.12	19	0.62	24	0.53	19	0.57
Friedman 1923b		20	0.43	69	0.00	23	0.12	21	0.60	29	0.51	21	0.55
Friedman 1930		29	0.36	41	0.00	32	0.10	31	0.47	40	0.36	30	0.41
Garcia 2007		51	0.26	84	0.00	50	0.07	52	0.07	59	0.05	58	0.06
Garcia 2007b		34	0.35	36	0.00	44	0.13	43	0.28	32	0.34	37	0.31
Gierzod 1998		61	0.21	48	0.00	62	0.07	55	0.07	47	0.08	52	0.07
Gornostaeva 1994		82	0.04	49	0.00	82	0.05	77	0.05	83	0.02	79	0.03
Groot 1988		15	0.48	27	0.00	13	0.17	16	0.68	15	0.53	15	0.60
Harasiewicz 1955		46	0.29	55	0.00	54	0.06	59	0.06	68	0.04	72	0.05
Hatto 1993		14	0.49	25	0.00	15	0.15	11	0.75	13	0.59	13	0.67
Hatto 1997		54	0.24	87	0.00	56	0.07	57	0.07	69	0.04	68	0.05
Horowitz 1949		40	0.31	75	0.00	52	0.07	58	0.07	68	0.05	56	0.06
Indjic 1988		13	0.49	70	0.00	16	0.24	12	0.75	13	0.63	12	0.69
Kapell 1951		27	0.38	37	0.00	31	0.08	25	0.52	33	0.27	35	0.37
Kissin 1993		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Kushner 1989		8	0.53	26	0.00	9	0.21	6	0.81	6	0.76	6	0.78
Luisada 1991		16	0.45	14	0.00	14	0.17	20	0.61	20	0.57	16	0.59
Lushtak 2004		37	0.33	44	0.00	28	0.11	30	0.47	11	0.52	25	0.49
Malcuzynski 1961		9	0.51	6	0.01	12	0.17	13	0.74	7	0.66	9	0.70
Magaloff 1978		36	0.33	22	0.00	27	0.08	29	0.50	31	0.37	28	0.43
Magin 1975		5	0.54	2	0.07	5	0.20	9	0.77	7	0.82	5	0.79
Michalowski 1933		42	0.31	59	0.00	51	0.06	63	0.06	65	0.06	57	0.06
Milkina 1970		72	0.13	88	0.00	70	0.06	61	0.06	63	0.04	64	0.05
Mohovich 1999		70	0.14	17	0.00	71	0.08	51	0.08	83	0.03	71	0.05
Moravec 1969		32	0.36	64	0.00	37	0.08	36	0.43	28	0.32	34	0.37
Morozova 2008		33	0.35	56	0.00	38	0.11	37	0.41	40	0.13	41	0.23
Neighaus 1950		49	0.27	24	0.00	46	0.10	46	0.10	75	0.04	60	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		17	0.45	60	0.00	19	0.18	18	0.63	15	0.56	17	0.59
Ohlsson 1999		30	0.36	31	0.00	25	0.09	26	0.52	29	0.31	31	0.40
Osinska 1989		81	0.07	82	0.00	78	0.05	72	0.05	84	0.02	76	0.03
Pachmann 1927		31	0.36	34	0.00	36	0.09	32	0.46	33	0.45	27	0.45
Paderewski 1930		3	0.58	3	0.06	3	0.32	4	0.83	1	0.83	3	0.83
Perlemuter 1992		23	0.41	5	0.02	24	0.13	23	0.55	24	0.57	20	0.56
Pierdomenico 2008		28	0.36	50	0.00	34	0.11	33	0.46	15	0.54	23	0.50
Poblocka 1999		44	0.30	65	0.00	39	0.11	38	0.35	42	0.17	39	0.24
Rabcewiczowa 1932		89	-0.05	76	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02	85	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		56	0.24	23	0.00	58	0.07	54	0.07	70	0.03	62	0.05
Rangell 2001		65	0.18	89	0.00	72	0.05	68	0.05	86	0.02	80	0.03
Richter 1976		11	0.50	11	0.01	11	0.17	8	0.78	18	0.76	8	0.77
Rosen 1989		64	0.19	90	0.00	68	0.07	56	0.07	83	0.03	70	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		73	0.12	66	0.00	81	0.04	78	0.04	79	0.03	78	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		77	0.10	32	0.00	77	0.04	80	0.04	58	0.04	74	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		80	0.07	29	0.00	80	0.04	81	0.04	75	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		68	0.16	71	0.00	73	0.05	71	0.05	70	0.03	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.01	72	0.00	85	0.03	85	0.03	87	0.02	89	0.02
Rossi 2007		79	0.07	28	0.00	49	0.06	65	0.06	14	0.45	46	0.16
Rubinstein 1939		67	0.17	85	0.00	48	0.06	60	0.06	44	0.12	50	0.08
Rubinstein 1952		41	0.31	18	0.00	45	0.09	45	0.17	39	0.17	45	0.17
Rubinstein 1966		35	0.35	9	0.01	20	0.14	27	0.51	21	0.37	29	0.43
Schilhawsky 1960		62	0.20	35	0.00	67	0.05	70	0.05	63	0.05	67	0.05
Shebanova 2002		1	0.71	1	0.70	1	0.69	1	0.92	3	0.89	1	0.90
Smith 1975		69	0.15	61	0.00	66	0.06	62	0.06	55	0.06	53	0.06
Sokolov 2002		57	0.24	38	0.00	59	0.06	66	0.06	58	0.04	61	0.05
Sztompka 1959		10	0.51	7	0.01	10	0.15	14	0.73	10	0.66	11	0.69
Tomsic 1995		39	0.31	77	0.00	43	0.11	40	0.30	39	0.13	43	0.20
Uninsky 1932		7	0.53	13	0.00	6	0.22	10	0.76	11	0.64	10	0.70
Uninsky 1971		53	0.24	16	0.00	47	0.10	47	0.10	63	0.05	51	0.07
Wasowski 1980		21	0.42	51	0.00	21	0.11	22	0.58	32	0.45	22	0.51
Zak 1937		55	0.24	30	0.00	55	0.05	67	0.05	70	0.05	63	0.05
Zak 1951		60	0.22	91	0.00	63	0.05	74	0.05	58	0.05	65	0.05
Average		6	0.53	20	0.00	4	0.25	3	0.85	59	0.05	42	0.21
Random 1		76	0.11	52	0.00	74	0.05	76	0.05	2	0.56	44	0.17
Random 2		83	0.04	57	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	62	0.04	77	0.03
Random 3		87	0.00	58	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	52	0.04	87	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).