Rosenthal 1931c

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		21	0.32	41	0.00	13	0.16	12	0.61	26	0.43	14	0.51
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.23	53	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.14	47	0.07	42	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		44	0.23	66	0.00	52	0.05	53	0.05	72	0.05	57	0.05
Bacha 2000		33	0.26	38	0.00	34	0.09	32	0.37	44	0.12	27	0.21
Badura 1965		68	0.16	25	0.00	59	0.04	58	0.04	66	0.04	64	0.04
Barbosa 1983		77	0.12	42	0.00	86	0.02	84	0.02	82	0.03	86	0.02
Biret 1990		88	0.04	46	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	77	0.03	89	0.02
Blet 2003		67	0.16	54	0.00	74	0.03	73	0.03	69	0.04	80	0.03
Block 1995		43	0.23	87	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.16	71	0.04	46	0.08
Blumental 1952		58	0.19	77	0.00	41	0.07	41	0.20	58	0.05	44	0.10
Boshniakovich 1969		70	0.15	55	0.00	53	0.04	60	0.04	71	0.04	65	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		35	0.26	20	0.00	38	0.07	38	0.26	41	0.19	25	0.22
Bunin 1987		72	0.15	88	0.00	75	0.03	69	0.03	71	0.04	82	0.03
Bunin 1987b		71	0.15	47	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	76	0.04	75	0.03
Chiu 1999		27	0.29	78	0.00	33	0.11	37	0.26	62	0.06	39	0.12
Cohen 1997		8	0.40	4	0.03	7	0.27	8	0.69	5	0.69	7	0.69
Cortot 1951		6	0.43	16	0.00	10	0.14	7	0.70	6	0.70	6	0.70
Csalog 1996		84	0.08	89	0.00	82	0.03	74	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03
Czerny 1949		26	0.29	43	0.00	23	0.09	25	0.47	16	0.71	10	0.58
Czerny 1990		73	0.14	59	0.00	79	0.02	78	0.02	72	0.03	88	0.02
Duchoud 2007		69	0.16	79	0.00	46	0.06	47	0.06	70	0.04	56	0.05
Ezaki 2006		7	0.43	9	0.00	6	0.25	6	0.75	10	0.67	5	0.71
Falvay 1989		47	0.22	39	0.00	50	0.06	48	0.06	71	0.03	59	0.04
Farrell 1958		56	0.20	27	0.00	66	0.04	61	0.04	66	0.04	60	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		22	0.32	60	0.00	28	0.13	27	0.47	18	0.73	9	0.59
Fliere 1977		31	0.27	33	0.00	31	0.11	29	0.44	72	0.04	37	0.13
Fou 1978		53	0.21	56	0.00	55	0.04	66	0.04	82	0.03	73	0.03
Francois 1956		20	0.32	32	0.00	9	0.20	17	0.54	22	0.55	12	0.54
Friedman 1923		60	0.19	48	0.00	61	0.04	59	0.04	63	0.06	58	0.05
Friedman 1923b		63	0.17	71	0.00	70	0.03	68	0.03	66	0.05	66	0.04
Friedman 1930		61	0.18	67	0.00	63	0.04	57	0.04	63	0.05	63	0.04
Garcia 2007		52	0.21	13	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.15	65	0.05	45	0.09
Garcia 2007b		86	0.06	90	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	73	0.04	83	0.03
Gierzod 1998		11	0.36	18	0.00	8	0.25	11	0.63	10	0.68	8	0.65
Gornostaeva 1994		29	0.28	80	0.00	35	0.08	31	0.39	39	0.23	20	0.30
Groot 1988		42	0.23	44	0.00	30	0.13	30	0.43	65	0.06	33	0.16
Harasiewicz 1955		49	0.22	29	0.00	57	0.05	52	0.05	78	0.03	68	0.04
Hatto 1993		46	0.23	34	0.00	56	0.04	63	0.04	70	0.05	67	0.04
Hatto 1997		37	0.24	21	0.00	49	0.06	46	0.06	54	0.06	52	0.06
Horowitz 1949		75	0.13	49	0.00	76	0.02	80	0.02	74	0.04	76	0.03
Indjic 1988		62	0.17	57	0.00	69	0.02	79	0.02	74	0.04	78	0.03
Kapell 1951		87	0.05	68	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	82	0.02	90	0.01
Kissin 1993		66	0.16	61	0.00	68	0.03	70	0.03	71	0.05	62	0.04
Kushner 1989		36	0.25	81	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.12	81	0.03	49	0.06
Luisada 1991		80	0.11	62	0.00	84	0.01	88	0.01	78	0.04	84	0.02
Lushtak 2004		38	0.24	58	0.00	40	0.08	40	0.22	57	0.05	43	0.10
Malcuzynski 1961		24	0.31	30	0.00	18	0.14	18	0.52	33	0.21	19	0.33
Magaloff 1978		19	0.33	69	0.00	20	0.12	19	0.51	41	0.23	18	0.34
Magin 1975		82	0.09	72	0.00	73	0.02	82	0.02	69	0.04	72	0.03
Michalowski 1933		78	0.12	82	0.00	80	0.03	71	0.03	76	0.04	77	0.03
Milkina 1970		65	0.16	73	0.00	54	0.04	64	0.04	48	0.08	50	0.06
Mohovich 1999		13	0.34	8	0.00	12	0.13	9	0.66	19	0.48	11	0.56
Moravec 1969		18	0.33	83	0.00	26	0.08	24	0.48	55	0.04	34	0.14
Morozova 2008		15	0.33	5	0.01	16	0.14	26	0.47	38	0.15	21	0.27
Neighaus 1950		10	0.38	11	0.00	14	0.17	10	0.65	51	0.08	24	0.23
Niedzielski 1931		32	0.26	36	0.00	25	0.08	28	0.46	50	0.07	30	0.18
Ohlsson 1999		39	0.24	50	0.00	48	0.05	55	0.05	71	0.04	61	0.04
Osinska 1989		48	0.22	74	0.00	51	0.05	50	0.05	51	0.06	53	0.05
Pachmann 1927		54	0.21	31	0.00	58	0.05	56	0.05	48	0.07	51	0.06
Paderewski 1930		34	0.26	84	0.00	36	0.05	33	0.31	61	0.06	35	0.14
Perlemuter 1992		57	0.20	75	0.00	39	0.07	39	0.25	66	0.04	41	0.10
Pierdomenico 2008		59	0.19	37	0.00	64	0.03	67	0.03	65	0.04	71	0.03
Poblocka 1999		83	0.08	91	0.00	78	0.02	81	0.02	79	0.04	70	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		16	0.33	19	0.00	19	0.10	21	0.50	24	0.56	13	0.53
Rachmaninoff 1923		40	0.23	6	0.01	24	0.08	34	0.30	41	0.16	26	0.22
Rangell 2001		17	0.33	15	0.00	11	0.13	14	0.58	17	0.42	16	0.49
Richter 1976		50	0.22	76	0.00	65	0.04	62	0.04	56	0.06	54	0.05
Rosen 1989		9	0.38	12	0.00	15	0.15	13	0.59	38	0.28	17	0.41
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.51	23	0.00	5	0.38	4	0.82	2	0.82	4	0.82
Rosenthal 1931		2	0.70	2	0.15	2	0.70	2	0.95	3	0.96	1	0.95
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.75	1	0.68	1	0.67	1	0.95	3	0.96	2	0.95
Rosenthal 1931c		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931d		3	0.68	3	0.08	3	0.80	3	0.93	3	0.95	3	0.94
Rossi 2007		81	0.10	35	0.00	60	0.06	49	0.06	26	0.26	38	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		30	0.27	28	0.00	32	0.10	36	0.27	35	0.15	29	0.20
Rubinstein 1952		51	0.22	22	0.00	37	0.07	35	0.30	64	0.04	40	0.11
Rubinstein 1966		12	0.35	24	0.00	22	0.12	16	0.55	58	0.05	32	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		85	0.06	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	0.02	91	0.01
Shebanova 2002		64	0.17	70	0.00	72	0.02	76	0.02	68	0.06	81	0.03
Smith 1975		25	0.29	17	0.00	17	0.12	20	0.50	17	0.50	15	0.50
Sokolov 2002		45	0.23	26	0.00	47	0.05	51	0.05	45	0.08	48	0.06
Sztompka 1959		14	0.34	14	0.00	21	0.14	15	0.56	47	0.10	23	0.24
Tomsic 1995		28	0.28	7	0.01	29	0.17	22	0.49	41	0.12	22	0.24
Uninsky 1932		55	0.20	40	0.00	62	0.05	54	0.05	64	0.05	55	0.05
Uninsky 1971		23	0.31	63	0.00	27	0.09	23	0.48	51	0.07	31	0.18
Wasowski 1980		79	0.11	51	0.00	85	0.02	83	0.02	72	0.05	69	0.03
Zak 1937		76	0.12	64	0.00	81	0.03	72	0.03	72	0.03	74	0.03
Zak 1951		74	0.14	65	0.00	77	0.02	77	0.02	73	0.03	85	0.02
Average		5	0.47	10	0.00	4	0.26	5	0.77	52	0.06	28	0.21
Random 1		89	0.03	86	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	19	0.33	47	0.08
Random 2		91	0.00	45	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	58	0.05	87	0.02
Random 3		90	0.01	52	0.00	67	0.04	65	0.04	12	0.47	36	0.14

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).