Rachmaninoff 1923

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

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).