Zak 1937

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		27	0.52	53	0.00	30	0.10	30	0.29	38	0.13	34	0.19
Anderszewski 2003		80	0.30	28	0.00	64	0.04	66	0.04	50	0.03	82	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		35	0.50	54	0.00	22	0.09	23	0.36	39	0.15	33	0.23
Bacha 2000		42	0.48	29	0.00	56	0.06	47	0.06	14	0.47	37	0.17
Badura 1965		66	0.37	55	0.00	54	0.05	54	0.05	49	0.05	61	0.05
Barbosa 1983		19	0.56	56	0.00	15	0.09	15	0.45	11	0.51	12	0.48
Biret 1990		28	0.52	30	0.00	24	0.09	19	0.39	18	0.46	16	0.42
Blet 2003		21	0.54	57	0.00	36	0.06	37	0.22	34	0.24	32	0.23
Block 1995		62	0.40	16	0.00	69	0.04	71	0.04	49	0.04	68	0.04
Blumental 1952		63	0.38	58	0.00	65	0.04	68	0.04	37	0.17	52	0.08
Boshniakovich 1969		16	0.56	2	0.00	14	0.10	12	0.47	11	0.57	8	0.52
Brailowsky 1960		31	0.51	59	0.00	35	0.06	33	0.24	13	0.44	24	0.32
Bunin 1987		29	0.51	60	0.00	37	0.05	35	0.22	46	0.07	44	0.12
Bunin 1987b		30	0.51	9	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.22	47	0.07	43	0.12
Chiu 1999		7	0.59	31	0.00	5	0.20	4	0.63	10	0.61	3	0.62
Cohen 1997		84	0.22	5	0.00	79	0.04	74	0.04	53	0.05	70	0.04
Cortot 1951		72	0.35	61	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	73	0.03	86	0.03
Csalog 1996		26	0.53	32	0.00	20	0.08	28	0.32	4	0.58	15	0.43
Czerny 1949		60	0.41	62	0.00	63	0.05	48	0.05	46	0.07	54	0.06
Czerny 1990		50	0.47	33	0.00	47	0.04	65	0.04	72	0.04	73	0.04
Duchoud 2007		40	0.49	34	0.00	44	0.04	45	0.08	55	0.05	55	0.06
Ezaki 2006		45	0.48	10	0.00	40	0.05	39	0.19	58	0.05	47	0.10
Falvay 1989		6	0.63	35	0.00	8	0.14	5	0.59	11	0.48	6	0.53
Farrell 1958		47	0.47	63	0.00	52	0.05	49	0.05	17	0.37	41	0.14
Ferenczy 1958		79	0.30	64	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	85	0.02	89	0.02
Fliere 1977		10	0.58	17	0.00	17	0.08	14	0.45	31	0.23	23	0.32
Fou 1978		11	0.57	65	0.00	12	0.12	9	0.53	19	0.43	9	0.48
Francois 1956		25	0.53	36	0.00	19	0.08	20	0.39	25	0.32	22	0.35
Friedman 1923		87	0.16	37	0.00	87	0.04	73	0.04	70	0.04	76	0.04
Friedman 1923b		86	0.18	38	0.00	85	0.03	79	0.03	56	0.05	71	0.04
Friedman 1930		82	0.23	39	0.00	76	0.03	84	0.03	77	0.03	83	0.03
Garcia 2007		70	0.35	18	0.00	70	0.05	50	0.05	20	0.41	42	0.14
Garcia 2007b		85	0.21	40	0.00	78	0.04	76	0.04	31	0.25	49	0.10
Gierzod 1998		41	0.49	19	0.00	39	0.05	41	0.14	56	0.05	51	0.08
Gornostaeva 1994		58	0.43	66	0.00	67	0.04	67	0.04	67	0.04	72	0.04
Groot 1988		14	0.57	67	0.00	13	0.12	17	0.41	24	0.34	21	0.37
Harasiewicz 1955		46	0.47	20	0.00	10	0.10	21	0.38	39	0.17	30	0.25
Hatto 1993		73	0.34	11	0.00	60	0.08	44	0.08	61	0.04	56	0.06
Hatto 1997		67	0.36	68	0.00	59	0.05	64	0.05	61	0.04	67	0.04
Horowitz 1949		4	0.64	69	0.00	3	0.28	7	0.57	4	0.55	4	0.56
Indjic 1988		65	0.37	70	0.00	32	0.07	38	0.21	42	0.13	38	0.17
Kapell 1951		38	0.50	41	0.00	55	0.05	61	0.05	71	0.04	64	0.04
Kissin 1993		13	0.57	3	0.00	11	0.10	10	0.51	16	0.45	11	0.48
Kushner 1989		39	0.49	12	0.00	53	0.05	62	0.05	52	0.04	63	0.04
Luisada 1991		22	0.54	71	0.00	6	0.18	13	0.47	12	0.45	14	0.46
Lushtak 2004		9	0.58	42	0.00	9	0.11	6	0.58	12	0.52	5	0.55
Malcuzynski 1961		12	0.57	72	0.00	25	0.08	18	0.40	38	0.20	27	0.28
Magaloff 1978		33	0.51	43	0.00	31	0.09	24	0.35	39	0.16	31	0.24
Magin 1975		64	0.37	44	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.09	56	0.05	53	0.07
Michalowski 1933		83	0.22	13	0.00	73	0.03	86	0.03	71	0.04	80	0.03
Milkina 1970		36	0.50	73	0.00	34	0.06	32	0.27	28	0.31	26	0.29
Mohovich 1999		5	0.63	21	0.00	7	0.11	8	0.55	13	0.52	7	0.53
Moravec 1969		24	0.53	74	0.00	23	0.07	31	0.29	21	0.33	25	0.31
Morozova 2008		52	0.46	6	0.00	33	0.06	34	0.23	39	0.14	36	0.18
Neighaus 1950		3	0.66	7	0.00	4	0.28	3	0.70	11	0.57	2	0.63
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.45	75	0.00	49	0.05	59	0.05	6	0.47	39	0.15
Ohlsson 1999		23	0.53	76	0.00	21	0.08	27	0.32	33	0.20	29	0.25
Osinska 1989		44	0.48	45	0.00	48	0.05	53	0.05	54	0.06	57	0.05
Pachmann 1927		20	0.55	77	0.00	18	0.09	16	0.42	11	0.55	10	0.48
Paderewski 1930		74	0.33	78	0.00	82	0.03	88	0.03	83	0.02	88	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		34	0.50	79	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.14	37	0.15	40	0.14
Pierdomenico 2008		51	0.47	22	0.00	57	0.05	60	0.05	26	0.24	45	0.11
Poblocka 1999		43	0.48	8	0.00	46	0.05	63	0.05	77	0.04	62	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		77	0.31	80	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	72	0.03	79	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		55	0.45	81	0.00	41	0.06	40	0.16	33	0.20	35	0.18
Rangell 2001		37	0.50	46	0.00	51	0.05	57	0.05	30	0.25	46	0.11
Richter 1976		57	0.44	82	0.00	50	0.05	56	0.05	48	0.06	59	0.05
Rosen 1989		49	0.47	23	0.00	61	0.05	55	0.05	77	0.03	69	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		78	0.31	47	0.00	84	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.03	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		81	0.27	24	0.00	81	0.03	77	0.03	54	0.04	81	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.32	14	0.00	74	0.03	87	0.03	54	0.05	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		69	0.35	83	0.00	71	0.04	70	0.04	72	0.03	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		71	0.35	84	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	57	0.04	74	0.04
Rossi 2007		88	0.10	85	0.00	88	0.03	80	0.03	66	0.03	77	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		76	0.32	86	0.00	77	0.03	85	0.03	28	0.31	48	0.10
Rubinstein 1952		18	0.56	87	0.00	26	0.07	25	0.35	14	0.47	17	0.41
Rubinstein 1966		17	0.56	48	0.00	29	0.09	29	0.32	18	0.42	19	0.37
Schilhawsky 1960		32	0.51	88	0.00	28	0.08	26	0.33	16	0.42	20	0.37
Shebanova 2002		8	0.58	89	0.00	16	0.08	11	0.49	14	0.48	13	0.48
Smith 1975		61	0.41	49	0.00	66	0.04	69	0.04	82	0.03	78	0.03
Sokolov 2002		48	0.47	25	0.00	62	0.05	52	0.05	59	0.05	58	0.05
Sztompka 1959		68	0.35	50	0.00	72	0.04	72	0.04	67	0.04	65	0.04
Tomsic 1995		15	0.57	26	0.00	27	0.10	22	0.38	37	0.18	28	0.26
Uninsky 1932		53	0.46	27	0.00	58	0.05	58	0.05	59	0.05	60	0.05
Uninsky 1971		56	0.45	51	0.00	68	0.05	51	0.05	71	0.03	66	0.04
Wasowski 1980		59	0.42	52	0.00	45	0.04	46	0.07	45	0.12	50	0.09
Zak 1937		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Zak 1951		1	0.98	1	1.00	1	0.98	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Average		2	0.70	15	0.00	2	0.26	2	0.80	39	0.19	18	0.39
Random 1		89	-0.02	90	0.00	90	0.02	89	0.02	55	0.04	85	0.03
Random 2		91	-0.13	91	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	90	0.01	90	0.01
Random 3		90	-0.09	4	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	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).