Rachmaninoff 1923

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		4	0.71	6	0.03	7	0.15	5	0.57	20	0.41	9	0.48
Anderszewski 2003		25	0.61	68	0.00	42	0.06	40	0.13	31	0.18	40	0.15
Ashkenazy 1981		44	0.58	14	0.01	22	0.08	22	0.31	39	0.18	32	0.24
Bacha 2000		82	0.42	74	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	82	0.03	81	0.03
Badura 1965		50	0.57	19	0.01	65	0.04	72	0.04	43	0.14	59	0.07
Barbosa 1983		69	0.49	72	0.00	77	0.04	64	0.04	52	0.06	64	0.05
Biret 1990		30	0.61	45	0.00	47	0.05	54	0.05	67	0.05	67	0.05
Blet 2003		52	0.56	79	0.00	69	0.03	75	0.03	57	0.05	76	0.04
Block 1995		73	0.48	63	0.00	67	0.03	80	0.03	57	0.04	85	0.03
Blumental 1952		74	0.48	37	0.00	61	0.04	65	0.04	37	0.15	55	0.08
Boshniakovich 1969		63	0.52	58	0.00	72	0.03	78	0.03	53	0.05	79	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		38	0.59	35	0.00	70	0.03	74	0.03	54	0.05	69	0.04
Bunin 1987		40	0.58	67	0.00	27	0.06	30	0.20	14	0.44	27	0.30
Bunin 1987b		48	0.57	62	0.00	28	0.06	31	0.20	14	0.45	25	0.30
Chiu 1999		53	0.55	65	0.00	50	0.05	53	0.05	28	0.27	47	0.12
Cohen 1997		88	0.13	77	0.00	88	0.03	83	0.03	74	0.03	86	0.03
Cortot 1951		46	0.57	52	0.00	58	0.04	55	0.04	28	0.28	51	0.11
Csalog 1996		87	0.24	70	0.00	87	0.04	58	0.04	67	0.04	75	0.04
Czerny 1949		5	0.71	49	0.00	5	0.10	3	0.60	16	0.45	4	0.52
Czerny 1990		2	0.72	5	0.03	2	0.29	2	0.66	6	0.55	1	0.60
Duchoud 2007		33	0.60	22	0.01	32	0.05	28	0.23	21	0.36	30	0.29
Ezaki 2006		3	0.72	2	0.09	3	0.15	6	0.52	9	0.48	5	0.50
Falvay 1989		64	0.52	71	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	41	0.15	57	0.07
Farrell 1958		27	0.61	20	0.01	26	0.06	27	0.23	12	0.38	24	0.30
Ferenczy 1958		84	0.41	46	0.00	81	0.02	87	0.02	81	0.03	89	0.02
Fliere 1977		6	0.71	3	0.04	6	0.12	7	0.51	35	0.25	16	0.36
Fou 1978		49	0.57	42	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	64	0.04	71	0.04
Francois 1956		18	0.63	27	0.00	37	0.05	35	0.16	27	0.31	34	0.22
Friedman 1923		58	0.53	17	0.01	31	0.05	41	0.13	7	0.56	31	0.27
Friedman 1923b		56	0.54	23	0.01	29	0.06	34	0.16	6	0.58	28	0.30
Friedman 1930		37	0.59	10	0.02	14	0.07	24	0.26	11	0.47	19	0.35
Garcia 2007		54	0.55	73	0.00	54	0.04	63	0.04	15	0.42	45	0.13
Garcia 2007b		81	0.42	80	0.00	74	0.04	71	0.04	44	0.09	62	0.06
Gierzod 1998		42	0.58	54	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.10	63	0.04	61	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		35	0.59	13	0.01	36	0.05	39	0.13	35	0.20	38	0.16
Groot 1988		19	0.63	26	0.01	20	0.07	21	0.34	28	0.38	18	0.36
Harasiewicz 1955		8	0.66	9	0.02	9	0.09	9	0.49	24	0.36	11	0.42
Hatto 1993		72	0.48	89	0.00	64	0.04	73	0.04	47	0.07	68	0.05
Hatto 1997		60	0.53	87	0.00	55	0.06	46	0.06	71	0.04	65	0.05
Horowitz 1949		11	0.66	16	0.01	16	0.08	15	0.39	7	0.60	8	0.48
Indjic 1988		67	0.51	90	0.00	56	0.04	59	0.04	54	0.05	74	0.04
Kapell 1951		47	0.57	32	0.00	41	0.06	37	0.16	57	0.04	53	0.08
Kissin 1993		41	0.58	61	0.00	38	0.05	42	0.12	42	0.12	48	0.12
Kushner 1989		17	0.63	69	0.00	24	0.08	25	0.25	35	0.22	33	0.23
Luisada 1991		32	0.61	59	0.00	49	0.05	47	0.05	49	0.05	63	0.05
Lushtak 2004		28	0.61	78	0.00	25	0.07	23	0.31	48	0.06	44	0.14
Malcuzynski 1961		23	0.62	33	0.00	18	0.09	18	0.38	11	0.43	12	0.40
Magaloff 1978		16	0.64	18	0.01	23	0.08	19	0.36	18	0.37	17	0.36
Magin 1975		29	0.61	8	0.02	8	0.08	12	0.44	11	0.44	10	0.44
Michalowski 1933		80	0.43	39	0.00	62	0.04	68	0.04	47	0.09	60	0.06
Milkina 1970		43	0.58	12	0.02	43	0.05	44	0.12	51	0.05	54	0.08
Mohovich 1999		22	0.62	47	0.00	21	0.07	20	0.35	33	0.25	26	0.30
Moravec 1969		51	0.56	4	0.03	40	0.05	33	0.17	6	0.53	23	0.30
Morozova 2008		7	0.70	7	0.02	4	0.13	4	0.57	5	0.49	2	0.53
Neighaus 1950		10	0.66	43	0.00	12	0.08	13	0.43	32	0.21	29	0.30
Niedzielski 1931		36	0.59	30	0.00	30	0.05	29	0.21	12	0.45	22	0.31
Ohlsson 1999		26	0.61	29	0.00	34	0.05	36	0.16	45	0.08	50	0.11
Osinska 1989		34	0.60	24	0.01	48	0.05	48	0.05	45	0.09	56	0.07
Pachmann 1927		78	0.44	53	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	63	0.04	83	0.03
Paderewski 1930		77	0.46	66	0.00	82	0.02	89	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		9	0.66	31	0.00	19	0.12	17	0.38	17	0.37	13	0.37
Pierdomenico 2008		76	0.47	76	0.00	68	0.04	66	0.04	39	0.16	52	0.08
Poblocka 1999		70	0.49	86	0.00	71	0.03	79	0.03	55	0.05	70	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		45	0.58	56	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.12	25	0.30	35	0.19
Rachmaninoff 1923		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rangell 2001		85	0.36	91	0.00	83	0.03	86	0.03	78	0.03	87	0.03
Richter 1976		66	0.51	88	0.00	66	0.04	69	0.04	41	0.12	58	0.07
Rosen 1989		59	0.53	57	0.00	59	0.05	50	0.05	58	0.04	78	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		21	0.62	15	0.01	13	0.07	11	0.46	6	0.62	3	0.53
Rosenthal 1931		55	0.54	34	0.00	53	0.05	52	0.05	10	0.54	37	0.16
Rosenthal 1931b		61	0.53	21	0.01	51	0.05	51	0.05	9	0.52	39	0.16
Rosenthal 1931c		57	0.54	48	0.00	46	0.04	56	0.04	10	0.54	42	0.15
Rosenthal 1931d		62	0.53	36	0.00	60	0.05	49	0.05	16	0.43	41	0.15
Rossi 2007		68	0.50	50	0.00	73	0.04	67	0.04	15	0.37	46	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		83	0.41	11	0.02	85	0.03	82	0.03	69	0.04	82	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		86	0.34	82	0.00	86	0.04	60	0.04	72	0.04	80	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		71	0.48	25	0.01	79	0.03	81	0.03	67	0.04	84	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		14	0.65	44	0.00	17	0.09	14	0.40	31	0.34	15	0.37
Shebanova 2002		75	0.47	84	0.00	76	0.03	77	0.03	52	0.05	77	0.04
Smith 1975		39	0.58	40	0.00	35	0.04	38	0.14	35	0.14	43	0.14
Sokolov 2002		12	0.66	51	0.00	11	0.11	8	0.49	10	0.48	7	0.48
Sztompka 1959		20	0.62	41	0.00	39	0.06	32	0.18	40	0.19	36	0.18
Tomsic 1995		79	0.44	75	0.00	78	0.04	61	0.04	63	0.04	72	0.04
Uninsky 1932		24	0.62	60	0.00	33	0.06	26	0.24	18	0.45	21	0.33
Uninsky 1971		65	0.51	81	0.00	63	0.04	70	0.04	61	0.05	73	0.04
Wasowski 1980		31	0.61	28	0.00	52	0.04	57	0.04	19	0.29	49	0.11
Zak 1937		15	0.64	55	0.00	15	0.08	16	0.39	26	0.28	20	0.33
Zak 1951		13	0.65	38	0.00	10	0.10	10	0.46	25	0.29	14	0.37
Average		1	0.77	1	0.47	1	0.47	1	0.70	25	0.34	6	0.49
Random 1		91	-0.18	83	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	58	0.04	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.06	64	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	39	0.11	66	0.05
Random 3		90	-0.17	85	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	86	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).