Rubinstein 1939

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		36	0.43	23	0.00	56	0.04	62	0.04	86	0.02	73	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		43	0.42	19	0.01	47	0.07	45	0.07	69	0.03	47	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		47	0.41	21	0.00	59	0.04	74	0.04	88	0.02	78	0.03
Bacha 2000		18	0.49	45	0.00	15	0.06	18	0.35	57	0.05	17	0.13
Badura 1965		78	0.26	18	0.01	70	0.03	81	0.03	80	0.03	77	0.03
Barbosa 1983		31	0.45	26	0.00	26	0.06	32	0.27	57	0.05	21	0.12
Biret 1990		12	0.54	58	0.00	22	0.13	17	0.35	77	0.04	24	0.12
Blet 2003		20	0.48	56	0.00	34	0.06	33	0.24	68	0.03	35	0.08
Block 1995		81	0.24	78	0.00	54	0.05	54	0.05	64	0.04	59	0.04
Blumental 1952		21	0.48	69	0.00	23	0.08	24	0.30	85	0.02	36	0.08
Boshniakovich 1969		58	0.37	57	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	78	0.03	60	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		10	0.55	33	0.00	8	0.14	7	0.43	32	0.25	5	0.33
Bunin 1987		74	0.29	39	0.00	81	0.04	69	0.04	87	0.02	79	0.03
Bunin 1987b		75	0.28	38	0.00	80	0.03	77	0.03	86	0.02	86	0.02
Chiu 1999		32	0.45	67	0.00	25	0.07	30	0.28	63	0.04	27	0.11
Cohen 1997		16	0.51	5	0.02	3	0.21	6	0.46	5	0.49	3	0.47
Cortot 1951		66	0.35	86	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	87	0.02	82	0.03
Csalog 1996		37	0.43	64	0.00	7	0.11	16	0.36	26	0.27	6	0.31
Czerny 1949		70	0.33	53	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	82	0.03	71	0.03
Czerny 1990		28	0.46	82	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.13	70	0.04	42	0.07
Duchoud 2007		54	0.38	55	0.00	68	0.04	61	0.04	87	0.02	74	0.03
Ezaki 2006		40	0.43	40	0.00	58	0.03	76	0.03	81	0.03	63	0.03
Falvay 1989		26	0.47	44	0.00	16	0.08	29	0.29	50	0.07	16	0.14
Farrell 1958		3	0.61	43	0.00	9	0.18	11	0.39	66	0.04	19	0.12
Ferenczy 1958		60	0.37	37	0.00	69	0.04	65	0.04	40	0.08	45	0.06
Fliere 1977		11	0.54	70	0.00	17	0.07	8	0.42	73	0.03	25	0.11
Fou 1978		13	0.54	24	0.00	5	0.14	4	0.50	42	0.11	7	0.23
Francois 1956		63	0.36	51	0.00	62	0.04	64	0.04	78	0.03	84	0.03
Friedman 1923		86	0.19	88	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	81	0.03	85	0.03
Friedman 1923b		85	0.19	89	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	82	0.03	80	0.03
Friedman 1930		83	0.22	66	0.00	83	0.02	87	0.02	84	0.03	88	0.02
Garcia 2007		64	0.36	75	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	87	0.03	75	0.03
Garcia 2007b		59	0.37	72	0.00	32	0.05	34	0.23	61	0.04	31	0.10
Gierzod 1998		30	0.45	27	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.11	71	0.04	41	0.07
Gornostaeva 1994		56	0.38	62	0.00	48	0.05	50	0.05	72	0.03	61	0.04
Groot 1988		34	0.43	11	0.01	38	0.06	35	0.19	78	0.03	37	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		76	0.28	50	0.00	71	0.03	86	0.03	58	0.04	83	0.03
Hatto 1993		9	0.56	36	0.00	19	0.10	14	0.36	42	0.10	10	0.19
Hatto 1997		6	0.58	3	0.07	20	0.14	28	0.29	44	0.09	15	0.16
Horowitz 1949		55	0.38	28	0.00	64	0.05	57	0.05	62	0.04	56	0.04
Indjic 1988		5	0.58	15	0.01	18	0.06	15	0.36	43	0.09	12	0.18
Kapell 1951		41	0.42	7	0.02	13	0.06	41	0.16	87	0.02	44	0.06
Kissin 1993		35	0.43	35	0.00	36	0.05	31	0.27	65	0.04	30	0.10
Kushner 1989		29	0.46	52	0.00	46	0.06	47	0.06	75	0.03	55	0.04
Luisada 1991		4	0.60	13	0.01	6	0.12	5	0.47	46	0.06	14	0.17
Lushtak 2004		19	0.49	47	0.00	24	0.09	19	0.33	65	0.04	29	0.11
Malcuzynski 1961		77	0.27	46	0.00	79	0.04	70	0.04	76	0.03	68	0.03
Magaloff 1978		25	0.47	41	0.00	28	0.09	21	0.31	70	0.04	28	0.11
Magin 1975		62	0.37	6	0.02	49	0.06	49	0.06	71	0.03	54	0.04
Michalowski 1933		87	0.09	90	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	87	0.02	87	0.02
Milkina 1970		7	0.57	4	0.03	4	0.23	3	0.59	33	0.20	4	0.34
Mohovich 1999		22	0.48	48	0.00	33	0.06	23	0.30	60	0.05	23	0.12
Moravec 1969		44	0.41	25	0.00	39	0.06	37	0.18	79	0.03	38	0.07
Morozova 2008		14	0.53	10	0.01	21	0.11	27	0.30	81	0.03	34	0.09
Neighaus 1950		53	0.38	71	0.00	63	0.04	67	0.04	84	0.03	81	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		50	0.40	12	0.01	51	0.05	52	0.05	84	0.03	53	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		23	0.48	8	0.01	35	0.07	40	0.17	82	0.03	40	0.07
Osinska 1989		17	0.49	54	0.00	10	0.11	10	0.39	79	0.03	26	0.11
Pachmann 1927		51	0.39	73	0.00	40	0.06	39	0.17	57	0.05	33	0.09
Paderewski 1930		57	0.38	76	0.00	52	0.05	51	0.05	58	0.04	57	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		52	0.39	20	0.01	61	0.05	56	0.05	61	0.04	50	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		73	0.29	63	0.00	67	0.04	60	0.04	77	0.03	66	0.03
Poblocka 1999		61	0.37	9	0.01	55	0.05	58	0.05	72	0.04	51	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		65	0.36	68	0.00	60	0.04	59	0.04	76	0.03	67	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		45	0.41	17	0.01	57	0.04	68	0.04	81	0.03	65	0.03
Rangell 2001		72	0.30	34	0.00	50	0.06	46	0.06	76	0.03	62	0.04
Richter 1976		79	0.26	22	0.00	78	0.04	73	0.04	41	0.12	39	0.07
Rosen 1989		48	0.41	31	0.00	45	0.06	48	0.06	64	0.04	48	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		68	0.35	49	0.00	66	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.03	76	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		38	0.43	81	0.00	30	0.05	20	0.32	39	0.13	9	0.20
Rosenthal 1931b		42	0.42	84	0.00	31	0.08	22	0.31	37	0.10	13	0.18
Rosenthal 1931c		49	0.40	60	0.00	41	0.08	36	0.18	64	0.03	43	0.07
Rosenthal 1931d		33	0.44	74	0.00	27	0.06	26	0.30	36	0.15	8	0.21
Rossi 2007		84	0.20	80	0.00	76	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04	52	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rubinstein 1952		2	0.67	1	0.36	1	0.35	2	0.63	6	0.60	2	0.61
Rubinstein 1966		1	0.76	2	0.30	2	0.44	1	0.65	8	0.60	1	0.62
Schilhawsky 1960		71	0.32	83	0.00	74	0.03	79	0.03	88	0.03	70	0.03
Shebanova 2002		27	0.47	16	0.01	12	0.10	13	0.36	70	0.04	22	0.12
Smith 1975		46	0.41	42	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.12	88	0.02	46	0.05
Sokolov 2002		67	0.35	79	0.00	72	0.03	84	0.03	69	0.03	64	0.03
Sztompka 1959		69	0.34	32	0.00	77	0.05	53	0.05	82	0.03	58	0.04
Tomsic 1995		39	0.43	30	0.00	37	0.05	38	0.18	48	0.05	32	0.09
Uninsky 1932		82	0.23	77	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	85	0.02	89	0.02
Uninsky 1971		80	0.24	59	0.00	82	0.04	71	0.04	82	0.03	69	0.03
Wasowski 1980		24	0.48	14	0.01	29	0.06	25	0.30	56	0.05	18	0.12
Zak 1937		8	0.57	29	0.00	11	0.09	9	0.40	45	0.08	11	0.18
Zak 1951		15	0.52	65	0.00	14	0.06	12	0.37	70	0.04	20	0.12
Random 1		89	-0.11	87	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	36	0.23	49	0.05
Random 2		88	-0.08	61	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	47	0.05	72	0.03
Random 3		90	-0.13	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.01	90	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).