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		30	0.56	82	0.00	45	0.09	43	0.18	40	0.12	43	0.15
Anderszewski 2003		73	0.34	72	0.00	68	0.04	70	0.04	77	0.03	78	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		13	0.64	3	0.13	3	0.27	6	0.64	8	0.56	6	0.60
Bacha 2000		51	0.46	73	0.00	61	0.05	57	0.05	29	0.33	45	0.13
Badura 1965		50	0.47	68	0.00	47	0.06	51	0.06	18	0.38	44	0.15
Barbosa 1983		55	0.43	30	0.00	52	0.07	46	0.07	51	0.05	58	0.06
Biret 1990		59	0.42	80	0.00	64	0.05	55	0.05	60	0.04	72	0.04
Blet 2003		38	0.54	65	0.00	51	0.06	47	0.06	45	0.09	56	0.07
Block 1995		16	0.61	54	0.00	30	0.08	27	0.31	15	0.41	24	0.36
Blumental 1952		69	0.36	39	0.00	57	0.04	63	0.04	50	0.05	71	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		18	0.60	23	0.00	28	0.08	24	0.34	18	0.51	20	0.42
Brailowsky 1960		45	0.50	45	0.00	54	0.05	53	0.05	35	0.17	48	0.09
Bunin 1987		62	0.39	75	0.00	82	0.04	61	0.04	75	0.03	83	0.03
Bunin 1987b		61	0.39	90	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.03
Chiu 1999		46	0.48	49	0.00	33	0.07	33	0.28	20	0.44	25	0.35
Cohen 1997		80	0.30	29	0.00	72	0.04	73	0.04	48	0.06	65	0.05
Cortot 1951		68	0.36	50	0.00	80	0.02	87	0.02	79	0.03	90	0.02
Csalog 1996		49	0.47	9	0.01	26	0.06	45	0.16	6	0.57	30	0.30
Czerny 1949		65	0.38	76	0.00	65	0.04	64	0.04	76	0.03	81	0.03
Czerny 1990		14	0.63	35	0.00	21	0.07	17	0.43	16	0.40	21	0.41
Duchoud 2007		56	0.43	74	0.00	46	0.06	50	0.06	57	0.05	64	0.05
Ezaki 2006		17	0.61	40	0.00	35	0.07	28	0.31	32	0.24	33	0.27
Falvay 1989		6	0.69	58	0.00	8	0.11	9	0.56	7	0.55	9	0.55
Farrell 1958		66	0.37	31	0.00	76	0.04	68	0.04	68	0.03	74	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		78	0.31	55	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	83	0.02	87	0.02
Fliere 1977		7	0.68	22	0.00	7	0.11	5	0.68	4	0.66	3	0.67
Fou 1978		2	0.73	2	0.26	2	0.36	2	0.73	1	0.69	2	0.71
Francois 1956		42	0.52	24	0.00	37	0.07	40	0.19	41	0.15	41	0.17
Friedman 1923		88	0.03	51	0.00	88	0.02	86	0.02	78	0.03	91	0.02
Friedman 1923b		87	0.03	83	0.00	87	0.02	89	0.02	68	0.04	84	0.03
Friedman 1930		85	0.16	66	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	62	0.04	80	0.03
Garcia 2007		83	0.21	84	0.00	85	0.04	75	0.04	73	0.03	82	0.03
Garcia 2007b		86	0.13	33	0.00	86	0.03	77	0.03	74	0.03	85	0.03
Gierzod 1998		47	0.48	46	0.00	34	0.07	44	0.17	27	0.21	40	0.19
Gornostaeva 1994		29	0.57	37	0.00	22	0.08	31	0.30	32	0.24	34	0.27
Groot 1988		12	0.65	10	0.01	15	0.10	15	0.46	16	0.43	17	0.44
Harasiewicz 1955		43	0.51	14	0.01	24	0.07	26	0.32	28	0.24	32	0.28
Hatto 1993		79	0.31	36	0.00	39	0.08	42	0.18	58	0.04	53	0.08
Hatto 1997		81	0.28	85	0.00	53	0.06	52	0.06	77	0.03	69	0.04
Horowitz 1949		41	0.52	8	0.02	29	0.08	35	0.25	10	0.42	28	0.32
Indjic 1988		77	0.31	67	0.00	38	0.07	41	0.18	68	0.04	51	0.08
Kapell 1951		54	0.44	34	0.00	66	0.04	62	0.04	81	0.03	75	0.03
Kissin 1993		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Kushner 1989		10	0.67	27	0.00	10	0.12	7	0.58	6	0.64	5	0.61
Luisada 1991		23	0.57	26	0.00	9	0.10	18	0.42	8	0.47	16	0.44
Lushtak 2004		34	0.56	28	0.00	40	0.07	30	0.31	31	0.30	31	0.30
Malcuzynski 1961		3	0.73	6	0.03	4	0.17	4	0.68	2	0.64	4	0.66
Magaloff 1978		9	0.68	13	0.01	12	0.14	10	0.56	8	0.46	11	0.51
Magin 1975		15	0.63	11	0.01	11	0.12	11	0.56	2	0.61	8	0.58
Michalowski 1933		82	0.21	61	0.00	79	0.02	85	0.02	80	0.03	86	0.02
Milkina 1970		11	0.66	86	0.00	13	0.13	12	0.53	6	0.53	10	0.53
Mohovich 1999		27	0.57	41	0.00	44	0.09	39	0.19	35	0.22	37	0.20
Moravec 1969		24	0.57	42	0.00	20	0.08	20	0.37	9	0.48	18	0.42
Morozova 2008		39	0.53	81	0.00	43	0.07	38	0.21	48	0.06	47	0.11
Neighaus 1950		25	0.57	38	0.00	31	0.07	25	0.32	41	0.13	38	0.20
Niedzielski 1931		71	0.36	52	0.00	69	0.03	79	0.03	37	0.12	57	0.06
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.54	44	0.00	17	0.08	21	0.37	19	0.32	27	0.34
Osinska 1989		40	0.53	91	0.00	48	0.05	54	0.05	55	0.05	60	0.05
Pachmann 1927		48	0.48	18	0.00	49	0.06	48	0.06	20	0.45	42	0.16
Paderewski 1930		20	0.59	5	0.04	16	0.10	34	0.26	17	0.40	29	0.32
Perlemuter 1992		32	0.56	16	0.00	41	0.08	37	0.21	29	0.30	35	0.25
Pierdomenico 2008		33	0.56	69	0.00	23	0.06	19	0.41	4	0.61	12	0.50
Poblocka 1999		35	0.55	47	0.00	50	0.06	49	0.06	74	0.04	61	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		76	0.32	62	0.00	83	0.04	72	0.04	75	0.03	73	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		70	0.36	63	0.00	56	0.04	59	0.04	59	0.04	67	0.04
Rangell 2001		21	0.59	48	0.00	25	0.06	23	0.35	9	0.47	22	0.41
Richter 1976		19	0.60	12	0.01	27	0.07	29	0.31	18	0.37	26	0.34
Rosen 1989		36	0.54	77	0.00	42	0.08	36	0.22	34	0.22	36	0.22
Rosenthal 1930		67	0.37	70	0.00	77	0.04	71	0.04	58	0.04	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		72	0.35	53	0.00	70	0.03	76	0.03	31	0.22	52	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.33	78	0.00	75	0.04	74	0.04	40	0.15	54	0.08
Rosenthal 1931c		53	0.45	64	0.00	63	0.04	66	0.04	40	0.15	55	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d		63	0.38	87	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	36	0.14	59	0.06
Rossi 2007		74	0.33	79	0.00	62	0.04	67	0.04	14	0.35	46	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		84	0.21	88	0.00	71	0.03	82	0.03	35	0.20	50	0.08
Rubinstein 1952		8	0.68	32	0.00	14	0.12	8	0.58	3	0.62	7	0.60
Rubinstein 1966		26	0.57	17	0.00	32	0.06	22	0.35	9	0.50	19	0.42
Schilhawsky 1960		64	0.38	56	0.00	73	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03	79	0.03
Shebanova 2002		1	0.77	1	0.32	1	0.31	1	0.81	1	0.79	1	0.80
Smith 1975		31	0.56	20	0.00	36	0.07	32	0.29	42	0.13	39	0.19
Sokolov 2002		44	0.51	43	0.00	55	0.05	56	0.05	60	0.05	62	0.05
Sztompka 1959		52	0.46	15	0.01	58	0.05	58	0.05	74	0.04	68	0.04
Tomsic 1995		5	0.70	4	0.06	6	0.16	13	0.48	11	0.47	15	0.47
Uninsky 1932		58	0.42	25	0.00	59	0.04	69	0.04	48	0.06	63	0.05
Uninsky 1971		60	0.41	21	0.00	67	0.04	65	0.04	75	0.03	77	0.03
Wasowski 1980		57	0.42	57	0.00	60	0.04	60	0.04	60	0.05	66	0.04
Zak 1937		28	0.57	19	0.00	19	0.09	16	0.45	10	0.51	14	0.48
Zak 1951		22	0.59	59	0.00	18	0.10	14	0.47	12	0.51	13	0.49
Average		4	0.73	7	0.02	5	0.19	3	0.69	34	0.23	23	0.40
Random 1		89	0.00	60	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	12	0.39	49	0.09
Random 2		91	-0.03	89	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	50	0.05	88	0.02
Random 3		90	0.00	71	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	52	0.03	89	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).