Garcia 2007b

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