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	13	0.62	78	0.00	23	0.13	18	0.48	15	0.50	18	0.49
Anderszewski 2003	69	0.45	80	0.00	69	0.03	83	0.03	64	0.04	85	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981	5	0.66	4	0.04	5	0.25	5	0.69	1	0.70	5	0.69
Bacha 2000	46	0.53	82	0.00	52	0.06	54	0.06	6	0.54	42	0.18
Badura 1965	64	0.49	73	0.00	51	0.06	52	0.06	17	0.40	49	0.15
Barbosa 1983	59	0.50	50	0.00	42	0.05	43	0.10	24	0.37	41	0.19
Biret 1990	33	0.55	59	0.00	39	0.06	37	0.17	35	0.18	46	0.17
Blet 2003	50	0.52	58	0.00	67	0.07	47	0.07	40	0.12	59	0.09
Block 1995	43	0.54	25	0.00	47	0.05	68	0.05	16	0.42	52	0.14
Blumental 1952	58	0.50	68	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.10	14	0.34	43	0.18
Boshniakovich 1969	14	0.62	54	0.00	26	0.09	27	0.39	15	0.47	27	0.43
Brailowsky 1960	63	0.49	21	0.00	70	0.04	80	0.04	39	0.22	58	0.09
Bunin 1987	74	0.42	17	0.01	75	0.05	71	0.05	61	0.05	73	0.05
Bunin 1987b	75	0.41	52	0.00	76	0.05	72	0.05	58	0.05	70	0.05
Chiu 1999	15	0.61	10	0.01	11	0.15	6	0.60	1	0.77	6	0.68
Cohen 1997	79	0.40	81	0.00	78	0.05	63	0.05	30	0.25	57	0.11
Cortot 1951	67	0.46	43	0.00	77	0.04	77	0.04	37	0.16	62	0.08
Csalog 1996	44	0.54	41	0.00	32	0.10	32	0.27	6	0.63	28	0.41
Czerny 1949	66	0.47	70	0.00	61	0.04	79	0.04	57	0.05	77	0.04
Czerny 1990	9	0.64	14	0.01	15	0.08	12	0.53	19	0.40	23	0.46
Duchoud 2007	40	0.54	35	0.00	31	0.09	31	0.29	3	0.63	26	0.43
Ezaki 2006	36	0.55	34	0.00	55	0.07	46	0.07	64	0.04	66	0.05
Falvay 1989	22	0.59	60	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.19	29	0.34	37	0.25
Farrell 1958	62	0.49	63	0.00	71	0.04	81	0.04	53	0.06	68	0.05
Ferenczy 1958	76	0.41	86	0.00	81	0.06	53	0.06	59	0.04	72	0.05
Fliere 1977	3	0.70	3	0.06	3	0.29	3	0.72	1	0.70	2	0.71
Fou 1978	21	0.60	48	0.00	21	0.09	16	0.48	14	0.45	21	0.46
Francois 1956	60	0.49	61	0.00	63	0.03	85	0.03	48	0.05	82	0.04
Friedman 1923	83	0.35	29	0.00	80	0.05	67	0.05	72	0.04	83	0.04
Friedman 1923b	82	0.35	47	0.00	79	0.05	59	0.05	45	0.09	63	0.07
Friedman 1930	73	0.42	46	0.00	73	0.06	49	0.06	71	0.04	71	0.05
Garcia 2007	72	0.44	69	0.00	68	0.06	51	0.06	11	0.49	45	0.17
Garcia 2007b	71	0.44	57	0.00	56	0.05	61	0.05	5	0.56	47	0.17
Gierzod 1998	6	0.65	18	0.00	6	0.17	7	0.59	1	0.60	7	0.59
Gornostaeva 1994	47	0.53	66	0.00	64	0.04	75	0.04	55	0.04	79	0.04
Groot 1988	25	0.58	38	0.00	30	0.11	29	0.34	26	0.37	31	0.35
Harasiewicz 1955	53	0.51	45	0.00	45	0.04	76	0.04	64	0.04	80	0.04
Hatto 1993	41	0.54	11	0.01	8	0.15	11	0.55	7	0.58	9	0.56
Hatto 1997	57	0.50	67	0.00	19	0.08	30	0.32	25	0.28	34	0.30
Horowitz 1949	56	0.50	33	0.00	58	0.05	58	0.05	14	0.55	44	0.17
Indjic 1988	38	0.54	9	0.01	9	0.21	13	0.53	7	0.58	10	0.55
Kapell 1951	37	0.55	39	0.00	50	0.05	55	0.05	45	0.06	69	0.05
Kissin 1993	1	0.74	1	0.51	1	0.50	1	0.82	1	0.83	1	0.82
Kushner 1989	2	0.71	12	0.01	4	0.16	2	0.72	1	0.71	3	0.71
Luisada 1991	20	0.60	32	0.00	10	0.20	15	0.50	12	0.53	14	0.51
Lushtak 2004	18	0.60	27	0.00	25	0.09	23	0.46	12	0.51	19	0.48
Malcuzynski 1961	29	0.57	19	0.00	38	0.06	40	0.12	47	0.06	60	0.08
Magaloff 1978	26	0.58	8	0.01	33	0.08	33	0.24	26	0.27	36	0.25
Magin 1975	30	0.57	36	0.00	20	0.08	19	0.48	10	0.51	17	0.49
Michalowski 1933	70	0.45	74	0.00	57	0.05	62	0.05	20	0.37	51	0.14
Milkina 1970	16	0.61	55	0.00	22	0.11	20	0.47	17	0.44	24	0.45
Mohovich 1999	31	0.57	26	0.00	46	0.04	73	0.04	40	0.16	61	0.08
Moravec 1969	54	0.51	49	0.00	59	0.05	70	0.05	19	0.36	53	0.13
Morozova 2008	27	0.58	6	0.03	13	0.09	22	0.46	10	0.45	25	0.45
Neighaus 1950	8	0.64	40	0.00	16	0.07	9	0.56	7	0.54	11	0.55
Niedzielski 1931	55	0.50	22	0.00	34	0.08	34	0.20	7	0.55	32	0.33
Ohlsson 1999	4	0.68	2	0.13	2	0.24	4	0.71	1	0.71	4	0.71
Osinska 1989	19	0.60	42	0.00	28	0.10	25	0.42	28	0.39	29	0.40
Pachmann 1927	61	0.49	30	0.00	74	0.05	60	0.05	17	0.46	48	0.15
Paderewski 1930	65	0.47	76	0.00	54	0.07	48	0.07	23	0.28	50	0.14
Perlemuter 1992	34	0.55	51	0.00	43	0.06	41	0.12	13	0.46	38	0.23
Pierdomenico 2008	42	0.54	62	0.00	40	0.06	38	0.16	2	0.63	33	0.32
Poblocka 1999	7	0.65	5	0.03	7	0.16	8	0.56	5	0.53	12	0.54
Rabcewiczowa 1932	68	0.46	87	0.00	72	0.05	64	0.05	61	0.05	67	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923	78	0.41	83	0.00	62	0.05	57	0.05	81	0.03	74	0.04
Rangell 2001	35	0.55	16	0.01	35	0.08	36	0.18	14	0.43	35	0.28
Richter 1976	39	0.54	23	0.00	36	0.06	42	0.12	16	0.43	39	0.23
Rosen 1989	10	0.63	44	0.00	17	0.11	17	0.48	10	0.55	15	0.51
Rosenthal 1930	81	0.36	84	0.00	83	0.04	78	0.04	71	0.03	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931	86	0.30	88	0.00	87	0.04	82	0.04	59	0.04	76	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b	85	0.31	79	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	76	0.03	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c	80	0.38	72	0.00	82	0.05	69	0.05	78	0.03	81	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d	84	0.31	90	0.00	86	0.03	87	0.03	75	0.03	87	0.03
Rossi 2007	87	0.29	56	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.03
Rubinstein 1939	77	0.41	77	0.00	60	0.04	74	0.04	20	0.34	55	0.12
Rubinstein 1952	24	0.59	31	0.00	29	0.15	21	0.47	8	0.60	13	0.53
Rubinstein 1966	23	0.59	28	0.00	24	0.09	24	0.42	18	0.50	22	0.46
Schilhawsky 1960	49	0.52	15	0.01	41	0.04	39	0.15	30	0.33	40	0.22
Shebanova 2002	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Smith 1975	52	0.51	85	0.00	65	0.05	56	0.05	75	0.03	75	0.04
Sokolov 2002	51	0.52	53	0.00	66	0.07	45	0.07	53	0.06	64	0.06
Sztompka 1959	12	0.62	7	0.02	14	0.07	28	0.38	17	0.39	30	0.38
Tomsic 1995	32	0.56	20	0.00	48	0.05	65	0.05	20	0.33	54	0.13
Uninsky 1932	48	0.53	65	0.00	49	0.05	66	0.05	28	0.29	56	0.12
Uninsky 1971	45	0.54	37	0.00	53	0.06	50	0.06	52	0.06	65	0.06
Wasowski 1980	28	0.58	13	0.01	27	0.11	26	0.40	8	0.52	20	0.46
Zak 1937	11	0.63	24	0.00	12	0.14	10	0.55	6	0.62	8	0.58
Zak 1951	17	0.60	64	0.00	18	0.08	14	0.51	11	0.49	16	0.50
Random 1	89	-0.04	89	0.00	88	0.01	88	0.01	35	0.15	78	0.04
Random 2	90	-0.05	71	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	73	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3	88	-0.02	75	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	62	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).