Magaloff 1978

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		42	0.61	57	0.00	50	0.08	46	0.08	61	0.04	59	0.06
Anderszewski 2003		45	0.60	44	0.00	55	0.05	54	0.05	58	0.04	70	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		47	0.59	13	0.01	51	0.06	52	0.06	66	0.04	64	0.05
Bacha 2000		33	0.62	38	0.00	46	0.06	50	0.06	20	0.34	40	0.14
Badura 1965		79	0.44	78	0.00	76	0.03	77	0.03	62	0.04	85	0.03
Barbosa 1983		75	0.45	18	0.01	60	0.05	60	0.05	54	0.06	63	0.05
Biret 1990		22	0.66	39	0.00	40	0.05	36	0.18	61	0.05	51	0.09
Blet 2003		64	0.52	64	0.00	71	0.05	55	0.05	70	0.03	71	0.04
Block 1995		51	0.58	48	0.00	47	0.05	53	0.05	28	0.26	49	0.11
Blumental 1952		71	0.46	61	0.00	73	0.04	75	0.04	84	0.02	86	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		36	0.62	5	0.04	12	0.07	39	0.16	60	0.04	54	0.08
Brailowsky 1960		4	0.74	3	0.10	3	0.18	8	0.48	2	0.61	2	0.54
Bunin 1987		74	0.45	43	0.00	79	0.03	78	0.03	55	0.05	77	0.04
Bunin 1987b		76	0.44	25	0.00	78	0.03	84	0.03	55	0.05	66	0.04
Chiu 1999		63	0.52	82	0.00	48	0.08	47	0.08	37	0.18	44	0.12
Cohen 1997		72	0.46	51	0.00	69	0.04	70	0.04	10	0.39	47	0.12
Cortot 1951		65	0.50	47	0.00	82	0.03	86	0.03	72	0.04	87	0.03
Csalog 1996		80	0.44	83	0.00	75	0.03	85	0.03	74	0.03	82	0.03
Czerny 1949		57	0.55	65	0.00	67	0.04	76	0.04	70	0.04	75	0.04
Czerny 1990		18	0.69	20	0.01	20	0.07	11	0.44	36	0.17	28	0.27
Duchoud 2007		69	0.47	76	0.00	81	0.02	88	0.02	78	0.03	89	0.02
Ezaki 2006		15	0.69	58	0.00	32	0.06	28	0.30	41	0.14	33	0.20
Falvay 1989		6	0.72	2	0.14	2	0.17	2	0.57	5	0.62	1	0.59
Farrell 1958		11	0.70	59	0.00	19	0.08	10	0.47	7	0.49	9	0.48
Ferenczy 1958		77	0.44	91	0.00	86	0.03	79	0.03	67	0.04	83	0.03
Fliere 1977		3	0.74	6	0.03	6	0.12	3	0.56	26	0.31	14	0.42
Fou 1978		26	0.65	67	0.00	22	0.09	14	0.42	28	0.30	19	0.35
Francois 1956		23	0.66	21	0.00	26	0.06	23	0.32	23	0.37	20	0.34
Friedman 1923		88	0.30	85	0.00	88	0.04	73	0.04	67	0.05	79	0.04
Friedman 1923b		87	0.30	79	0.00	87	0.04	66	0.04	65	0.05	78	0.04
Friedman 1930		70	0.47	60	0.00	63	0.04	68	0.04	67	0.05	74	0.04
Garcia 2007		68	0.47	81	0.00	74	0.04	62	0.04	54	0.05	76	0.04
Garcia 2007b		86	0.36	86	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	67	0.04	88	0.03
Gierzod 1998		12	0.70	35	0.00	33	0.08	24	0.32	35	0.24	26	0.28
Gornostaeva 1994		5	0.74	42	0.00	11	0.08	6	0.49	9	0.53	4	0.51
Groot 1988		9	0.71	54	0.00	4	0.13	4	0.50	13	0.51	7	0.50
Harasiewicz 1955		60	0.54	53	0.00	36	0.06	38	0.16	49	0.05	52	0.09
Hatto 1993		83	0.41	71	0.00	66	0.04	61	0.04	34	0.17	55	0.08
Hatto 1997		78	0.44	45	0.00	62	0.05	58	0.05	38	0.13	53	0.08
Horowitz 1949		52	0.57	68	0.00	58	0.07	49	0.07	55	0.04	61	0.05
Indjic 1988		82	0.42	56	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	39	0.14	56	0.07
Kapell 1951		53	0.55	84	0.00	64	0.04	74	0.04	61	0.04	65	0.04
Kissin 1993		10	0.70	17	0.01	9	0.09	5	0.50	22	0.36	15	0.42
Kushner 1989		13	0.70	34	0.00	34	0.09	30	0.29	42	0.14	34	0.20
Luisada 1991		32	0.62	11	0.02	28	0.07	29	0.29	37	0.17	31	0.22
Lushtak 2004		44	0.60	33	0.00	17	0.08	25	0.31	30	0.22	29	0.26
Malcuzynski 1961		21	0.68	69	0.00	35	0.10	31	0.26	23	0.28	27	0.27
Magaloff 1978		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Magin 1975		43	0.61	46	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.15	45	0.09	45	0.12
Michalowski 1933		85	0.39	63	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	58	0.06	68	0.04
Milkina 1970		2	0.75	41	0.00	5	0.10	7	0.48	16	0.41	11	0.44
Mohovich 1999		7	0.72	14	0.01	10	0.08	9	0.47	24	0.39	13	0.43
Moravec 1969		50	0.58	24	0.00	57	0.05	56	0.05	22	0.36	42	0.13
Morozova 2008		62	0.52	32	0.00	53	0.04	64	0.04	64	0.04	73	0.04
Neighaus 1950		17	0.69	23	0.00	29	0.06	26	0.30	40	0.14	36	0.20
Niedzielski 1931		56	0.55	31	0.00	49	0.07	48	0.07	42	0.11	50	0.09
Ohlsson 1999		38	0.62	30	0.00	54	0.04	65	0.04	64	0.04	67	0.04
Osinska 1989		8	0.71	12	0.01	31	0.06	27	0.30	31	0.26	24	0.28
Pachmann 1927		59	0.54	55	0.00	56	0.04	67	0.04	11	0.38	46	0.12
Paderewski 1930		25	0.65	22	0.00	41	0.06	44	0.13	22	0.30	35	0.20
Perlemuter 1992		46	0.60	89	0.00	39	0.05	40	0.16	38	0.12	41	0.14
Pierdomenico 2008		48	0.59	7	0.02	8	0.10	20	0.36	11	0.45	16	0.40
Poblocka 1999		54	0.55	66	0.00	72	0.04	63	0.04	85	0.03	80	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		34	0.62	9	0.02	44	0.06	43	0.14	34	0.21	37	0.17
Rachmaninoff 1923		30	0.64	8	0.02	18	0.08	18	0.37	19	0.36	18	0.36
Rangell 2001		49	0.58	29	0.00	24	0.07	35	0.18	29	0.27	32	0.22
Richter 1976		73	0.46	75	0.00	77	0.02	87	0.02	65	0.04	81	0.03
Rosen 1989		16	0.69	19	0.01	23	0.07	22	0.34	23	0.31	22	0.32
Rosenthal 1930		27	0.64	52	0.00	38	0.06	34	0.20	11	0.48	23	0.31
Rosenthal 1931		29	0.64	88	0.00	21	0.07	19	0.37	5	0.65	8	0.49
Rosenthal 1931b		24	0.66	87	0.00	16	0.09	13	0.42	5	0.63	5	0.51
Rosenthal 1931c		14	0.69	16	0.01	14	0.07	16	0.41	7	0.64	6	0.51
Rosenthal 1931d		19	0.69	73	0.00	15	0.09	12	0.44	5	0.66	3	0.54
Rossi 2007		66	0.48	4	0.05	7	0.07	37	0.18	10	0.45	25	0.28
Rubinstein 1939		67	0.47	26	0.00	70	0.04	71	0.04	22	0.31	48	0.11
Rubinstein 1952		35	0.62	10	0.02	27	0.08	17	0.37	10	0.56	10	0.46
Rubinstein 1966		41	0.61	74	0.00	52	0.06	51	0.06	30	0.29	43	0.13
Schilhawsky 1960		61	0.53	77	0.00	61	0.05	59	0.05	60	0.04	72	0.04
Shebanova 2002		28	0.64	15	0.01	45	0.06	45	0.12	70	0.04	57	0.07
Smith 1975		20	0.68	40	0.00	13	0.07	15	0.41	17	0.37	17	0.39
Sokolov 2002		39	0.62	27	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.14	41	0.18	38	0.16
Sztompka 1959		55	0.55	37	0.00	68	0.04	69	0.04	61	0.06	62	0.05
Tomsic 1995		31	0.63	72	0.00	30	0.05	32	0.25	19	0.44	21	0.33
Uninsky 1932		84	0.41	50	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	75	0.04	84	0.03
Uninsky 1971		81	0.42	70	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	67	0.05	69	0.04
Wasowski 1980		58	0.54	28	0.00	59	0.05	57	0.05	52	0.05	60	0.05
Zak 1937		37	0.62	62	0.00	37	0.06	33	0.23	43	0.11	39	0.16
Zak 1951		40	0.61	36	0.00	25	0.06	21	0.35	36	0.15	30	0.23
Average		1	0.79	1	0.40	1	0.39	1	0.73	32	0.25	12	0.43
Random 1		91	-0.14	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	61	0.04	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.04	90	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	29	0.18	58	0.06
Random 3		90	-0.09	49	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	75	0.02	91	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).