Rosenthal 1931d

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		47	0.33	15	0.00	55	0.04	54	0.04	80	0.02	73	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		33	0.37	42	0.00	29	0.07	29	0.19	48	0.04	30	0.09
Ashkenazy 1981		38	0.36	43	0.00	41	0.05	41	0.10	89	0.02	59	0.04
Bacha 2000		31	0.38	35	0.00	58	0.04	68	0.04	77	0.03	61	0.03
Badura 1965		73	0.21	51	0.00	64	0.04	63	0.04	83	0.03	75	0.03
Barbosa 1983		79	0.18	52	0.00	82	0.03	77	0.03	85	0.02	84	0.02
Biret 1990		52	0.33	16	0.00	60	0.04	59	0.04	73	0.04	60	0.04
Blet 2003		71	0.24	67	0.00	75	0.02	82	0.02	88	0.02	85	0.02
Block 1995		16	0.44	53	0.00	20	0.10	23	0.29	43	0.10	11	0.17
Blumental 1952		78	0.19	54	0.00	71	0.04	67	0.04	84	0.02	76	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		34	0.37	55	0.00	30	0.05	32	0.16	78	0.03	37	0.07
Brailowsky 1960		6	0.56	68	0.00	5	0.19	7	0.55	7	0.51	5	0.53
Bunin 1987		25	0.40	69	0.00	39	0.04	38	0.13	74	0.03	44	0.06
Bunin 1987b		24	0.40	56	0.00	38	0.05	35	0.14	73	0.03	40	0.06
Chiu 1999		72	0.22	44	0.00	52	0.04	56	0.04	60	0.04	53	0.04
Cohen 1997		41	0.36	29	0.00	26	0.08	22	0.29	14	0.41	7	0.34
Cortot 1951		59	0.30	13	0.00	70	0.03	74	0.03	67	0.04	79	0.03
Csalog 1996		77	0.19	70	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	83	0.02	91	0.01
Czerny 1949		56	0.31	20	0.00	34	0.05	44	0.08	70	0.03	47	0.05
Czerny 1990		65	0.28	71	0.00	77	0.02	81	0.02	86	0.03	90	0.02
Duchoud 2007		68	0.26	36	0.00	81	0.03	78	0.03	85	0.03	74	0.03
Ezaki 2006		14	0.45	7	0.00	18	0.09	14	0.40	48	0.06	13	0.15
Falvay 1989		18	0.43	37	0.00	13	0.09	19	0.36	62	0.04	20	0.12
Farrell 1958		36	0.36	9	0.00	59	0.05	48	0.05	81	0.03	55	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		61	0.29	8	0.00	72	0.03	79	0.03	63	0.04	72	0.03
Fliere 1977		30	0.39	30	0.00	36	0.06	31	0.18	83	0.03	35	0.07
Fou 1978		15	0.44	38	0.00	14	0.08	10	0.43	52	0.06	12	0.16
Francois 1956		22	0.42	6	0.00	23	0.11	15	0.38	60	0.04	26	0.12
Friedman 1923		87	0.09	72	0.00	74	0.03	71	0.03	47	0.07	49	0.05
Friedman 1923b		86	0.10	73	0.00	73	0.02	80	0.02	71	0.04	77	0.03
Friedman 1930		81	0.16	74	0.00	56	0.04	66	0.04	80	0.03	71	0.03
Garcia 2007		74	0.20	24	0.00	69	0.03	76	0.03	86	0.02	88	0.02
Garcia 2007b		84	0.14	39	0.00	37	0.05	43	0.09	47	0.05	38	0.07
Gierzod 1998		17	0.44	57	0.00	28	0.06	25	0.27	58	0.05	23	0.12
Gornostaeva 1994		8	0.49	4	0.00	15	0.06	16	0.38	53	0.04	24	0.12
Groot 1988		11	0.46	75	0.00	12	0.14	9	0.44	46	0.05	14	0.15
Harasiewicz 1955		46	0.33	58	0.00	17	0.10	18	0.36	52	0.04	25	0.12
Hatto 1993		76	0.19	25	0.00	78	0.03	73	0.03	78	0.03	78	0.03
Hatto 1997		69	0.25	21	0.00	32	0.04	40	0.10	56	0.04	43	0.06
Horowitz 1949		20	0.43	76	0.00	11	0.10	13	0.40	35	0.16	10	0.25
Indjic 1988		75	0.19	59	0.00	79	0.03	69	0.03	80	0.03	69	0.03
Kapell 1951		64	0.28	45	0.00	80	0.03	72	0.03	85	0.02	82	0.02
Kissin 1993		32	0.38	60	0.00	43	0.06	36	0.14	78	0.03	42	0.06
Kushner 1989		13	0.45	77	0.00	21	0.09	24	0.27	77	0.03	29	0.09
Luisada 1991		37	0.36	46	0.00	54	0.04	62	0.04	71	0.04	51	0.04
Lushtak 2004		63	0.28	61	0.00	33	0.05	42	0.09	77	0.03	48	0.05
Malcuzynski 1961		9	0.49	40	0.00	16	0.08	17	0.38	71	0.04	22	0.12
Magaloff 1978		5	0.56	31	0.00	6	0.22	6	0.60	32	0.20	6	0.35
Magin 1975		43	0.35	78	0.00	40	0.04	37	0.14	80	0.03	39	0.06
Michalowski 1933		88	0.06	79	0.00	85	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.03	68	0.03
Milkina 1970		12	0.46	10	0.00	10	0.10	11	0.43	35	0.21	8	0.30
Mohovich 1999		21	0.42	80	0.00	22	0.07	21	0.34	48	0.06	16	0.14
Moravec 1969		28	0.40	22	0.00	48	0.04	53	0.04	60	0.04	50	0.04
Morozova 2008		49	0.33	81	0.00	27	0.07	27	0.26	79	0.03	31	0.09
Neighaus 1950		26	0.40	62	0.00	31	0.05	28	0.22	80	0.03	34	0.08
Niedzielski 1931		60	0.30	41	0.00	63	0.04	64	0.04	71	0.03	65	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		53	0.32	47	0.00	67	0.05	50	0.05	79	0.03	57	0.04
Osinska 1989		54	0.32	48	0.00	65	0.05	46	0.05	71	0.04	52	0.04
Pachmann 1927		66	0.27	63	0.00	46	0.05	47	0.05	55	0.05	45	0.05
Paderewski 1930		48	0.33	82	0.00	66	0.04	60	0.04	81	0.03	67	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		57	0.31	17	0.00	51	0.04	55	0.04	77	0.03	62	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		51	0.33	83	0.00	35	0.04	30	0.18	62	0.04	33	0.08
Poblocka 1999		62	0.29	84	0.00	83	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.03	81	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		67	0.26	18	0.00	49	0.04	61	0.04	65	0.04	54	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		27	0.40	32	0.00	19	0.11	12	0.40	56	0.04	18	0.13
Rangell 2001		10	0.47	12	0.00	9	0.11	20	0.35	47	0.06	17	0.14
Richter 1976		58	0.30	26	0.00	62	0.03	70	0.03	75	0.03	66	0.03
Rosen 1989		19	0.43	33	0.00	25	0.07	26	0.27	57	0.04	27	0.10
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.60	5	0.00	4	0.25	4	0.75	4	0.72	4	0.73
Rosenthal 1931		2	0.86	2	0.00	2	0.90	2	0.97	2	0.97	2	0.97
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.93	1	0.97	1	0.96	1	0.99	2	0.99	1	0.99
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.76	3	0.00	3	0.84	3	0.93	3	0.91	3	0.92
Rosenthal 1931d		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rossi 2007		83	0.15	14	0.00	68	0.04	52	0.04	72	0.03	64	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		50	0.33	34	0.00	24	0.07	34	0.15	9	0.46	9	0.26
Rubinstein 1952		29	0.39	23	0.00	42	0.05	33	0.16	45	0.11	19	0.13
Rubinstein 1966		40	0.36	64	0.00	50	0.05	49	0.05	54	0.06	46	0.05
Schilhawsky 1960		45	0.34	49	0.00	47	0.04	51	0.04	66	0.03	70	0.03
Shebanova 2002		70	0.25	65	0.00	76	0.02	84	0.02	81	0.03	87	0.02
Smith 1975		23	0.41	19	0.00	8	0.20	8	0.50	80	0.03	21	0.12
Sokolov 2002		42	0.36	66	0.00	61	0.04	65	0.04	76	0.03	63	0.03
Sztompka 1959		80	0.17	27	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	87	0.02	83	0.02
Tomsic 1995		39	0.36	85	0.00	45	0.04	45	0.08	65	0.04	41	0.06
Uninsky 1932		82	0.15	86	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	86	0.02	86	0.02
Uninsky 1971		55	0.31	11	0.00	57	0.04	58	0.04	59	0.04	58	0.04
Wasowski 1980		85	0.14	87	0.00	90	0.02	89	0.02	85	0.03	80	0.02
Zak 1937		44	0.35	88	0.00	53	0.04	57	0.04	75	0.04	56	0.04
Zak 1951		35	0.37	89	0.00	44	0.05	39	0.11	70	0.04	36	0.07
Average		7	0.54	28	0.00	7	0.22	5	0.63	83	0.03	15	0.14
Random 1		89	0.04	90	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	5	0.50	28	0.10
Random 2		90	0.04	91	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	6	0.43	32	0.09
Random 3		91	-0.03	50	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	65	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).