Morozova 2008

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		7	0.71	18	0.01	4	0.13	4	0.50	18	0.43	7	0.46
Anderszewski 2003		37	0.61	53	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.10	28	0.20	43	0.14
Ashkenazy 1981		12	0.69	10	0.01	10	0.13	8	0.42	24	0.36	9	0.39
Bacha 2000		84	0.40	65	0.00	51	0.04	59	0.04	47	0.07	72	0.05
Badura 1965		16	0.67	6	0.02	12	0.08	10	0.38	3	0.61	6	0.48
Barbosa 1983		57	0.55	34	0.00	53	0.05	47	0.05	24	0.27	47	0.12
Biret 1990		41	0.60	37	0.00	26	0.06	32	0.21	36	0.19	36	0.20
Blet 2003		20	0.67	62	0.00	35	0.07	27	0.24	24	0.31	22	0.27
Block 1995		71	0.50	70	0.00	47	0.04	57	0.04	40	0.11	68	0.07
Blumental 1952		40	0.60	13	0.01	40	0.05	39	0.13	20	0.23	39	0.17
Boshniakovich 1969		19	0.67	82	0.00	31	0.05	34	0.18	19	0.39	24	0.26
Brailowsky 1960		49	0.58	7	0.02	64	0.04	50	0.04	36	0.23	52	0.10
Bunin 1987		60	0.54	49	0.00	70	0.04	53	0.04	35	0.26	57	0.10
Bunin 1987b		62	0.54	33	0.00	69	0.04	55	0.04	36	0.27	55	0.10
Chiu 1999		24	0.65	39	0.00	30	0.05	26	0.24	11	0.49	14	0.34
Cohen 1997		88	0.26	63	0.00	88	0.04	61	0.04	80	0.03	85	0.03
Cortot 1951		47	0.59	45	0.00	60	0.04	65	0.04	33	0.21	62	0.09
Csalog 1996		87	0.29	67	0.00	87	0.03	70	0.03	71	0.04	84	0.03
Czerny 1949		27	0.63	3	0.07	9	0.15	11	0.35	30	0.28	18	0.31
Czerny 1990		6	0.72	15	0.01	8	0.15	7	0.42	20	0.39	8	0.40
Duchoud 2007		51	0.57	75	0.00	45	0.04	44	0.08	22	0.35	38	0.17
Ezaki 2006		4	0.75	4	0.05	7	0.14	16	0.33	22	0.33	16	0.33
Falvay 1989		63	0.53	47	0.00	72	0.03	71	0.03	61	0.05	77	0.04
Farrell 1958		39	0.60	20	0.01	48	0.04	63	0.04	26	0.25	54	0.10
Ferenczy 1958		70	0.50	46	0.00	85	0.02	85	0.02	76	0.03	89	0.02
Fliere 1977		3	0.75	5	0.05	3	0.14	3	0.55	14	0.45	4	0.50
Fou 1978		15	0.68	44	0.00	14	0.09	13	0.34	17	0.39	11	0.36
Francois 1956		67	0.51	78	0.00	38	0.05	40	0.12	35	0.22	41	0.16
Friedman 1923		76	0.47	73	0.00	78	0.04	66	0.04	29	0.29	51	0.11
Friedman 1923b		75	0.48	77	0.00	77	0.02	88	0.02	29	0.29	67	0.08
Friedman 1930		58	0.54	31	0.00	66	0.04	48	0.04	31	0.28	49	0.11
Garcia 2007		56	0.56	89	0.00	67	0.04	60	0.04	29	0.30	50	0.11
Garcia 2007b		66	0.52	85	0.00	63	0.04	58	0.04	26	0.19	63	0.09
Gierzod 1998		44	0.60	30	0.00	29	0.05	35	0.18	45	0.11	45	0.14
Gornostaeva 1994		55	0.56	12	0.01	49	0.04	67	0.04	48	0.05	80	0.04
Groot 1988		54	0.56	27	0.00	39	0.05	42	0.11	38	0.20	42	0.15
Harasiewicz 1955		21	0.66	83	0.00	23	0.06	28	0.24	36	0.18	34	0.21
Hatto 1993		35	0.62	84	0.00	32	0.06	30	0.22	22	0.26	30	0.24
Hatto 1997		25	0.64	86	0.00	19	0.06	25	0.24	23	0.27	27	0.25
Horowitz 1949		46	0.59	40	0.00	65	0.04	49	0.04	26	0.38	46	0.12
Indjic 1988		33	0.62	88	0.00	33	0.09	29	0.22	22	0.29	26	0.25
Kapell 1951		53	0.56	50	0.00	44	0.04	45	0.07	72	0.04	74	0.05
Kissin 1993		9	0.70	68	0.00	20	0.06	19	0.30	20	0.38	15	0.34
Kushner 1989		5	0.73	2	0.12	2	0.20	2	0.58	3	0.60	1	0.59
Luisada 1991		2	0.78	17	0.01	6	0.11	6	0.46	8	0.50	5	0.48
Lushtak 2004		11	0.69	28	0.00	13	0.09	14	0.34	22	0.28	19	0.31
Malcuzynski 1961		68	0.51	72	0.00	59	0.03	72	0.03	82	0.03	82	0.03
Magaloff 1978		65	0.52	29	0.00	50	0.04	64	0.04	64	0.04	76	0.04
Magin 1975		8	0.70	11	0.01	11	0.12	21	0.27	16	0.31	20	0.29
Michalowski 1933		69	0.50	52	0.00	46	0.04	68	0.04	43	0.16	65	0.08
Milkina 1970		48	0.59	22	0.01	16	0.07	20	0.27	32	0.24	25	0.25
Mohovich 1999		36	0.61	54	0.00	52	0.04	54	0.04	62	0.04	79	0.04
Moravec 1969		81	0.43	23	0.01	57	0.03	76	0.03	37	0.23	64	0.08
Morozova 2008		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Neighaus 1950		34	0.62	9	0.01	27	0.05	15	0.34	42	0.12	37	0.20
Niedzielski 1931		82	0.43	74	0.00	74	0.03	81	0.03	55	0.04	81	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		30	0.63	21	0.01	28	0.05	24	0.24	32	0.25	29	0.24
Osinska 1989		26	0.64	26	0.00	22	0.06	23	0.25	33	0.24	28	0.24
Pachmann 1927		77	0.45	80	0.00	86	0.03	73	0.03	72	0.04	83	0.03
Paderewski 1930		73	0.50	79	0.00	84	0.02	84	0.02	73	0.03	88	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		14	0.68	71	0.00	21	0.07	17	0.33	16	0.38	12	0.35
Pierdomenico 2008		59	0.54	81	0.00	62	0.03	69	0.03	33	0.31	53	0.10
Poblocka 1999		45	0.60	57	0.00	55	0.04	62	0.04	47	0.06	73	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		43	0.60	38	0.00	25	0.06	38	0.17	26	0.30	31	0.23
Rachmaninoff 1923		10	0.70	19	0.01	5	0.11	5	0.49	4	0.57	2	0.53
Rangell 2001		86	0.36	32	0.00	73	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03	86	0.03
Richter 1976		50	0.58	64	0.00	68	0.04	52	0.04	27	0.28	48	0.11
Rosen 1989		38	0.61	8	0.02	24	0.06	31	0.22	30	0.24	32	0.23
Rosenthal 1930		72	0.50	56	0.00	58	0.03	78	0.03	25	0.27	61	0.09
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.43	58	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	29	0.23	66	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.40	76	0.00	81	0.03	77	0.03	37	0.10	75	0.05
Rosenthal 1931c		79	0.43	43	0.00	79	0.02	87	0.02	39	0.18	70	0.06
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.38	69	0.00	82	0.02	89	0.02	53	0.05	87	0.03
Rossi 2007		74	0.49	61	0.00	83	0.02	83	0.02	37	0.17	69	0.06
Rubinstein 1939		64	0.53	24	0.01	75	0.03	82	0.03	28	0.30	58	0.09
Rubinstein 1952		78	0.45	25	0.00	76	0.03	75	0.03	43	0.14	71	0.06
Rubinstein 1966		42	0.60	51	0.00	54	0.05	46	0.05	23	0.40	44	0.14
Schilhawsky 1960		32	0.62	66	0.00	36	0.07	37	0.17	37	0.26	33	0.21
Shebanova 2002		29	0.63	14	0.01	18	0.06	18	0.31	20	0.35	17	0.33
Smith 1975		23	0.65	36	0.00	41	0.06	36	0.17	33	0.16	40	0.16
Sokolov 2002		31	0.62	48	0.00	37	0.06	33	0.20	31	0.35	23	0.26
Sztompka 1959		18	0.67	16	0.01	34	0.06	22	0.26	26	0.32	21	0.29
Tomsic 1995		61	0.54	59	0.00	71	0.04	51	0.04	36	0.20	59	0.09
Uninsky 1932		28	0.63	55	0.00	56	0.04	56	0.04	33	0.26	56	0.10
Uninsky 1971		52	0.57	60	0.00	61	0.03	74	0.03	66	0.05	78	0.04
Wasowski 1980		22	0.66	41	0.00	42	0.05	41	0.11	14	0.36	35	0.20
Zak 1937		17	0.67	42	0.00	17	0.06	12	0.34	23	0.36	13	0.35
Zak 1951		13	0.68	35	0.00	15	0.09	9	0.40	21	0.34	10	0.37
Average		1	0.79	1	0.39	1	0.39	1	0.73	18	0.38	3	0.53
Random 1		91	-0.16	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	67	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.04	87	0.00	89	0.02	86	0.02	10	0.38	60	0.09
Random 3		90	-0.11	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	69	0.03	91	0.02

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).