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	34	0.55	78	0.00	37	0.06	40	0.17	50	0.06	55	0.10
Anderszewski 2003	17	0.59	2	0.13	4	0.21	3	0.54	3	0.60	3	0.57
Ashkenazy 1981	40	0.55	63	0.00	23	0.06	22	0.37	23	0.41	24	0.39
Bacha 2000	71	0.46	50	0.00	59	0.04	73	0.04	28	0.35	48	0.12
Badura 1965	80	0.39	47	0.00	60	0.04	76	0.04	67	0.04	79	0.04
Barbosa 1983	55	0.51	28	0.00	32	0.08	31	0.28	6	0.58	22	0.40
Biret 1990	15	0.60	59	0.00	19	0.09	14	0.41	8	0.54	14	0.47
Blet 2003	30	0.56	21	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.21	5	0.52	32	0.33
Block 1995	70	0.47	38	0.00	65	0.04	69	0.04	31	0.21	57	0.09
Blumental 1952	65	0.48	14	0.01	11	0.11	29	0.31	5	0.46	26	0.38
Boshniakovich 1969	59	0.50	69	0.00	72	0.05	56	0.05	56	0.05	74	0.05
Brailowsky 1960	72	0.44	67	0.00	81	0.04	65	0.04	48	0.07	67	0.05
Bunin 1987	22	0.58	40	0.00	33	0.11	26	0.34	6	0.55	17	0.43
Bunin 1987b	21	0.58	48	0.00	24	0.06	19	0.39	6	0.56	12	0.47
Chiu 1999	76	0.42	58	0.00	67	0.04	59	0.04	35	0.24	51	0.10
Cohen 1997	85	0.31	81	0.00	84	0.04	64	0.04	60	0.04	81	0.04
Cortot 1951	44	0.54	66	0.00	17	0.11	27	0.32	7	0.59	18	0.43
Csalog 1996	33	0.55	9	0.02	53	0.04	62	0.04	8	0.62	42	0.16
Czerny 1949	6	0.61	24	0.00	7	0.12	6	0.51	13	0.55	7	0.53
Czerny 1990	2	0.68	4	0.07	3	0.20	1	0.61	2	0.75	1	0.68
Duchoud 2007	32	0.55	56	0.00	34	0.08	34	0.24	13	0.46	33	0.33
Ezaki 2006	19	0.59	51	0.00	26	0.07	15	0.40	18	0.43	21	0.41
Falvay 1989	49	0.53	55	0.00	64	0.04	75	0.04	41	0.14	62	0.07
Farrell 1958	54	0.51	18	0.01	45	0.04	60	0.04	13	0.43	47	0.13
Ferenczy 1958	7	0.61	83	0.00	13	0.08	11	0.44	1	0.66	4	0.54
Fliere 1977	5	0.62	11	0.02	12	0.10	20	0.39	38	0.26	34	0.32
Fou 1978	60	0.49	17	0.01	56	0.04	58	0.04	64	0.05	77	0.04
Francois 1956	29	0.56	65	0.00	49	0.04	61	0.04	29	0.37	50	0.12
Friedman 1923	86	0.31	68	0.00	76	0.04	80	0.04	63	0.05	87	0.04
Friedman 1923b	84	0.31	75	0.00	75	0.04	77	0.04	71	0.04	82	0.04
Friedman 1930	75	0.43	27	0.00	61	0.04	68	0.04	24	0.36	49	0.12
Garcia 2007	73	0.44	45	0.00	58	0.04	71	0.04	4	0.62	43	0.16
Garcia 2007b	78	0.41	77	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.10	9	0.49	41	0.22
Gierzod 1998	18	0.59	84	0.00	28	0.08	18	0.39	29	0.39	23	0.39
Gornostaeva 1994	39	0.55	42	0.00	66	0.05	52	0.05	42	0.12	60	0.08
Groot 1988	45	0.54	32	0.00	63	0.04	70	0.04	58	0.04	84	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955	35	0.55	5	0.05	5	0.18	5	0.53	14	0.47	10	0.50
Hatto 1993	63	0.49	15	0.01	15	0.09	30	0.30	14	0.39	30	0.34
Hatto 1997	46	0.53	10	0.02	9	0.14	17	0.39	7	0.49	16	0.44
Horowitz 1949	68	0.47	71	0.00	77	0.04	63	0.04	47	0.06	70	0.05
Indjic 1988	56	0.51	74	0.00	14	0.09	28	0.32	14	0.41	28	0.36
Kapell 1951	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Kissin 1993	48	0.53	53	0.00	68	0.03	82	0.03	47	0.07	71	0.05
Kushner 1989	9	0.61	46	0.00	30	0.08	21	0.38	30	0.28	31	0.33
Luisada 1991	51	0.51	44	0.00	57	0.04	74	0.04	46	0.08	63	0.06
Lushtak 2004	25	0.57	16	0.01	10	0.15	8	0.48	3	0.59	8	0.53
Malcuzynski 1961	12	0.60	19	0.01	29	0.08	35	0.23	22	0.32	38	0.27
Magaloff 1978	58	0.50	41	0.00	73	0.05	46	0.05	58	0.05	68	0.05
Magin 1975	61	0.49	60	0.00	71	0.05	54	0.05	65	0.04	76	0.04
Michalowski 1933	66	0.47	70	0.00	21	0.10	32	0.28	10	0.47	27	0.36
Milkina 1970	24	0.57	36	0.00	52	0.05	47	0.05	47	0.07	65	0.06
Mohovich 1999	20	0.59	57	0.00	35	0.06	33	0.25	28	0.35	36	0.30
Moravec 1969	14	0.60	12	0.01	42	0.06	42	0.12	7	0.60	37	0.27
Morozova 2008	57	0.51	22	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.18	43	0.12	45	0.15
Neighaus 1950	50	0.52	86	0.00	48	0.04	57	0.04	56	0.05	85	0.04
Niedzielski 1931	53	0.51	20	0.01	62	0.04	78	0.04	18	0.45	46	0.13
Ohlsson 1999	23	0.58	61	0.00	20	0.08	23	0.37	28	0.34	29	0.35
Osinska 1989	10	0.61	25	0.00	25	0.06	16	0.39	21	0.46	19	0.42
Pachmann 1927	79	0.40	64	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	52	0.06	78	0.04
Paderewski 1930	42	0.54	85	0.00	46	0.05	53	0.05	5	0.47	44	0.15
Perlemuter 1992	67	0.47	90	0.00	70	0.05	50	0.05	56	0.05	66	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008	74	0.43	43	0.00	74	0.03	81	0.03	50	0.07	69	0.05
Poblocka 1999	1	0.71	1	0.32	1	0.31	2	0.59	2	0.66	2	0.62
Rabcewiczowa 1932	16	0.59	62	0.00	22	0.08	13	0.42	4	0.56	11	0.48
Rachmaninoff 1923	62	0.49	26	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.09	40	0.11	52	0.10
Rangell 2001	47	0.53	7	0.03	51	0.05	51	0.05	37	0.19	56	0.10
Richter 1976	37	0.55	37	0.00	40	0.06	38	0.19	7	0.55	35	0.32
Rosen 1989	43	0.54	52	0.00	50	0.04	67	0.04	60	0.05	80	0.04
Rosenthal 1930	64	0.49	72	0.00	78	0.05	49	0.05	52	0.06	73	0.05
Rosenthal 1931	82	0.37	87	0.00	85	0.03	86	0.03	54	0.04	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b	83	0.35	89	0.00	87	0.04	72	0.04	60	0.04	86	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c	69	0.47	80	0.00	79	0.04	79	0.04	42	0.16	61	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d	81	0.37	73	0.00	86	0.03	87	0.03	51	0.05	83	0.04
Rossi 2007	87	0.27	29	0.00	82	0.03	85	0.03	30	0.21	59	0.08
Rubinstein 1939	77	0.42	30	0.00	80	0.03	84	0.03	41	0.12	64	0.06
Rubinstein 1952	52	0.51	6	0.05	55	0.05	48	0.05	58	0.05	75	0.05
Rubinstein 1966	41	0.54	8	0.02	54	0.04	66	0.04	35	0.26	54	0.10
Schilhawsky 1960	8	0.61	34	0.00	8	0.14	9	0.47	5	0.58	9	0.52
Shebanova 2002	38	0.55	35	0.00	47	0.06	45	0.06	55	0.05	72	0.05
Smith 1975	26	0.57	79	0.00	31	0.08	24	0.37	20	0.39	25	0.38
Sokolov 2002	11	0.61	54	0.00	27	0.08	10	0.45	9	0.47	15	0.46
Sztompka 1959	3	0.64	3	0.10	2	0.21	4	0.54	8	0.53	6	0.53
Tomsic 1995	36	0.55	39	0.00	69	0.05	55	0.05	37	0.20	53	0.10
Uninsky 1932	31	0.55	31	0.00	16	0.08	25	0.36	13	0.50	20	0.42
Uninsky 1971	4	0.63	33	0.00	6	0.16	7	0.48	10	0.47	13	0.47
Wasowski 1980	13	0.60	13	0.01	18	0.10	12	0.44	1	0.63	5	0.53
Zak 1937	27	0.57	23	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.16	31	0.29	40	0.22
Zak 1951	28	0.56	49	0.00	36	0.06	36	0.21	31	0.28	39	0.24
Random 1	90	-0.09	82	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	68	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2	89	-0.04	76	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	52	0.05	89	0.02
Random 3	88	-0.02	88	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	13	0.41	58	0.09

Note: To load data table give above into Excel, copy and paste the data into a text editor (such as WordPad) first, then copy the text in the editor and past into Excel. You should remove the "target" line from the data before pasting into Excel so that plotting graphs of the data is done properly.

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).