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

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).