Duchoud 2007

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	0.66	4	0.04	6	0.08	4	0.45	40	0.19	21	0.29
Anderszewski 2003		20	0.60	60	0.00	19	0.08	25	0.33	20	0.29	17	0.31
Ashkenazy 1981		3	0.72	2	0.08	3	0.44	2	0.66	6	0.51	2	0.58
Bacha 2000		47	0.54	41	0.00	55	0.04	68	0.04	49	0.06	53	0.05
Badura 1965		44	0.56	76	0.00	32	0.09	28	0.32	29	0.32	14	0.32
Barbosa 1983		54	0.51	5	0.02	23	0.06	38	0.16	36	0.18	30	0.17
Biret 1990		7	0.65	15	0.01	20	0.11	18	0.38	36	0.19	23	0.27
Blet 2003		27	0.58	52	0.00	34	0.08	27	0.32	53	0.05	35	0.13
Block 1995		71	0.45	54	0.00	71	0.04	71	0.04	69	0.03	83	0.03
Blumental 1952		74	0.43	50	0.00	63	0.04	70	0.04	79	0.02	84	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		52	0.52	63	0.00	64	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04	69	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		70	0.45	70	0.00	79	0.04	64	0.04	76	0.04	60	0.04
Bunin 1987		24	0.59	72	0.00	37	0.14	23	0.34	20	0.39	9	0.36
Bunin 1987b		26	0.58	73	0.00	36	0.11	22	0.35	21	0.39	8	0.37
Chiu 1999		57	0.50	30	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.16	37	0.18	29	0.17
Cohen 1997		86	0.32	13	0.01	77	0.04	72	0.04	77	0.03	85	0.03
Cortot 1951		12	0.63	22	0.00	18	0.07	13	0.40	14	0.41	5	0.40
Csalog 1996		79	0.39	81	0.00	52	0.04	58	0.04	54	0.05	67	0.04
Czerny 1949		34	0.57	6	0.02	25	0.05	33	0.28	58	0.05	37	0.12
Czerny 1990		23	0.59	23	0.00	40	0.05	39	0.15	59	0.04	48	0.08
Duchoud 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ezaki 2006		10	0.63	51	0.00	27	0.06	30	0.32	43	0.09	28	0.17
Falvay 1989		76	0.42	80	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	74	0.04	74	0.03
Farrell 1958		40	0.56	10	0.02	57	0.04	59	0.04	73	0.04	62	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		60	0.49	85	0.00	51	0.05	51	0.05	60	0.04	68	0.04
Fliere 1977		4	0.66	55	0.00	7	0.08	14	0.39	50	0.05	33	0.14
Fou 1978		53	0.52	42	0.00	58	0.05	54	0.05	80	0.04	63	0.04
Francois 1956		55	0.51	64	0.00	56	0.04	65	0.04	62	0.04	71	0.04
Friedman 1923		78	0.40	43	0.00	69	0.05	49	0.05	40	0.16	44	0.09
Friedman 1923b		77	0.40	68	0.00	68	0.04	57	0.04	41	0.15	47	0.08
Friedman 1930		72	0.44	20	0.00	61	0.03	75	0.03	79	0.04	82	0.03
Garcia 2007		46	0.55	84	0.00	35	0.10	35	0.23	24	0.33	22	0.28
Garcia 2007b		75	0.42	79	0.00	62	0.04	55	0.04	73	0.03	88	0.03
Gierzod 1998		13	0.63	49	0.00	29	0.06	32	0.28	48	0.05	38	0.12
Gornostaeva 1994		33	0.57	9	0.02	41	0.06	36	0.17	42	0.10	36	0.13
Groot 1988		37	0.57	21	0.00	24	0.06	41	0.15	68	0.04	49	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		51	0.52	59	0.00	28	0.07	29	0.32	52	0.04	40	0.11
Hatto 1993		42	0.56	67	0.00	17	0.09	19	0.36	19	0.29	15	0.32
Hatto 1997		21	0.60	47	0.00	9	0.07	12	0.40	19	0.31	11	0.35
Horowitz 1949		59	0.50	33	0.00	67	0.03	73	0.03	45	0.07	57	0.05
Indjic 1988		30	0.58	61	0.00	11	0.06	16	0.38	19	0.32	10	0.35
Kapell 1951		8	0.65	40	0.00	10	0.07	8	0.42	34	0.20	20	0.29
Kissin 1993		58	0.50	66	0.00	66	0.04	60	0.04	62	0.04	66	0.04
Kushner 1989		9	0.63	14	0.01	33	0.08	34	0.26	50	0.05	39	0.11
Luisada 1991		41	0.56	29	0.00	48	0.05	46	0.05	69	0.04	59	0.04
Lushtak 2004		25	0.58	31	0.00	14	0.07	11	0.40	46	0.06	32	0.15
Malcuzynski 1961		43	0.56	26	0.00	53	0.04	61	0.04	74	0.03	77	0.03
Magaloff 1978		66	0.47	45	0.00	73	0.03	77	0.03	87	0.02	89	0.02
Magin 1975		15	0.62	53	0.00	12	0.06	15	0.38	22	0.28	13	0.33
Michalowski 1933		48	0.54	12	0.01	4	0.10	6	0.42	15	0.42	4	0.42
Milkina 1970		35	0.57	83	0.00	59	0.05	52	0.05	83	0.04	64	0.04
Mohovich 1999		31	0.58	16	0.01	44	0.05	44	0.10	54	0.05	51	0.07
Moravec 1969		69	0.47	17	0.01	78	0.04	69	0.04	62	0.04	58	0.04
Morozova 2008		32	0.57	44	0.00	31	0.07	21	0.35	43	0.08	31	0.17
Neighaus 1950		11	0.63	75	0.00	13	0.07	17	0.38	44	0.09	27	0.18
Niedzielski 1931		68	0.47	28	0.00	74	0.03	74	0.03	58	0.04	76	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		1	0.80	1	0.56	1	0.56	1	0.73	2	0.62	1	0.67
Osinska 1989		50	0.53	18	0.00	60	0.04	63	0.04	77	0.03	72	0.03
Pachmann 1927		83	0.37	87	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	67	0.04	79	0.03
Paderewski 1930		67	0.47	86	0.00	76	0.04	67	0.04	88	0.02	78	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		49	0.54	77	0.00	46	0.06	45	0.06	64	0.04	54	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		64	0.48	39	0.00	54	0.04	66	0.04	39	0.15	45	0.08
Poblocka 1999		14	0.63	58	0.00	8	0.06	7	0.42	29	0.23	16	0.31
Rabcewiczowa 1932		56	0.51	32	0.00	65	0.05	50	0.05	73	0.03	61	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		17	0.60	11	0.01	26	0.06	20	0.36	27	0.23	19	0.29
Rangell 2001		29	0.58	8	0.02	43	0.05	42	0.12	9	0.44	25	0.23
Richter 1976		61	0.49	89	0.00	49	0.05	47	0.05	33	0.19	41	0.10
Rosen 1989		38	0.57	34	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.15	67	0.04	46	0.08
Rosenthal 1930		65	0.48	37	0.00	50	0.04	56	0.04	34	0.20	43	0.09
Rosenthal 1931		81	0.38	90	0.00	82	0.03	82	0.03	59	0.04	80	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		84	0.35	56	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	71	0.03	90	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		73	0.44	62	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	52	0.04	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		82	0.37	48	0.00	86	0.03	84	0.03	64	0.05	70	0.04
Rossi 2007		87	0.25	74	0.00	87	0.03	80	0.03	73	0.04	73	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.38	24	0.00	84	0.02	87	0.02	61	0.04	75	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		85	0.35	35	0.00	83	0.02	88	0.02	73	0.04	87	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		62	0.49	25	0.00	72	0.03	79	0.03	68	0.04	81	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		22	0.60	27	0.00	15	0.08	10	0.42	35	0.27	12	0.34
Shebanova 2002		19	0.60	7	0.02	22	0.05	31	0.31	34	0.18	24	0.24
Smith 1975		16	0.62	19	0.00	21	0.07	26	0.33	33	0.15	26	0.22
Sokolov 2002		2	0.76	3	0.05	2	0.32	3	0.55	1	0.57	3	0.56
Sztompka 1959		5	0.66	46	0.00	5	0.08	5	0.45	24	0.32	6	0.38
Tomsic 1995		63	0.49	38	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	49	0.05	65	0.04
Uninsky 1932		28	0.58	69	0.00	30	0.07	24	0.34	30	0.29	18	0.31
Uninsky 1971		18	0.60	57	0.00	16	0.09	9	0.42	28	0.34	7	0.38
Wasowski 1980		36	0.57	36	0.00	39	0.05	43	0.10	78	0.04	52	0.06
Zak 1937		39	0.56	71	0.00	47	0.05	53	0.05	65	0.05	55	0.05
Zak 1951		45	0.56	65	0.00	45	0.05	48	0.05	65	0.05	56	0.05
Random 1		90	-0.07	82	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	12	0.43	50	0.07
Random 2		89	-0.01	88	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	9	0.40	42	0.09
Random 3		88	0.15	78	0.00	88	0.03	85	0.03	1	0.70	34	0.14

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).