Random 1

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		84	-0.20	72	0.00	79	0.02	77	0.02	91	0.01	88	0.01
Anderszewski 2003		67	-0.16	50	0.00	64	0.03	70	0.03	91	0.01	62	0.02
Ashkenazy 1981		63	-0.15	80	0.00	67	0.05	47	0.05	91	0.01	70	0.02
Bacha 2000		61	-0.15	45	0.00	69	0.04	60	0.04	91	0.01	48	0.02
Badura 1965		16	-0.08	84	0.00	21	0.10	11	0.44	91	0.01	17	0.07
Barbosa 1983		7	-0.05	15	0.01	31	0.06	29	0.29	91	0.01	36	0.05
Biret 1990		59	-0.14	49	0.00	66	0.04	64	0.04	91	0.01	72	0.02
Blet 2003		31	-0.10	74	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.15	91	0.01	41	0.04
Block 1995		28	-0.10	11	0.02	18	0.07	25	0.33	90	0.01	28	0.06
Blumental 1952		58	-0.14	73	0.00	15	0.08	43	0.13	91	0.01	42	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		24	-0.10	38	0.00	23	0.08	24	0.34	90	0.01	29	0.06
Brailowsky 1960		79	-0.20	62	0.00	88	0.01	90	0.01	91	0.01	78	0.01
Bunin 1987		3	-0.02	18	0.00	3	0.19	5	0.51	89	0.01	18	0.07
Bunin 1987b		4	-0.02	26	0.00	4	0.18	6	0.51	89	0.01	13	0.07
Chiu 1999		39	-0.12	79	0.00	55	0.04	62	0.04	91	0.01	54	0.02
Cohen 1997		17	-0.08	14	0.01	10	0.12	16	0.37	90	0.02	5	0.09
Cortot 1951		6	-0.05	5	0.05	8	0.16	4	0.55	90	0.01	21	0.07
Csalog 1996		12	-0.07	44	0.00	25	0.06	27	0.32	90	0.01	24	0.06
Czerny 1949		64	-0.15	29	0.00	70	0.03	75	0.03	91	0.01	66	0.02
Czerny 1990		78	-0.19	85	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	91	0.01	90	0.01
Duchoud 2007		11	-0.07	48	0.00	20	0.07	12	0.43	91	0.01	16	0.07
Ezaki 2006		70	-0.17	42	0.00	76	0.03	71	0.03	91	0.01	47	0.02
Falvay 1989		80	-0.20	81	0.00	89	0.01	87	0.01	91	0.01	79	0.01
Farrell 1958		53	-0.14	55	0.00	63	0.03	66	0.03	91	0.01	57	0.02
Ferenczy 1958		77	-0.19	24	0.00	82	0.02	80	0.02	91	0.01	87	0.01
Fliere 1977		47	-0.13	33	0.00	52	0.04	57	0.04	90	0.01	51	0.02
Fou 1978		44	-0.12	66	0.00	39	0.08	28	0.29	91	0.01	34	0.05
Francois 1956		86	-0.21	75	0.00	85	0.02	81	0.02	91	0.01	91	0.01
Friedman 1923		13	-0.07	10	0.02	6	0.16	14	0.43	86	0.02	7	0.09
Friedman 1923b		10	-0.07	3	0.14	5	0.15	15	0.43	88	0.01	19	0.07
Friedman 1930		85	-0.21	25	0.00	72	0.03	72	0.03	91	0.01	64	0.02
Garcia 2007		40	-0.12	35	0.00	36	0.08	34	0.26	90	0.01	37	0.05
Garcia 2007b		14	-0.08	31	0.00	13	0.08	10	0.47	89	0.02	4	0.10
Gierzod 1998		57	-0.14	88	0.00	71	0.03	68	0.03	91	0.01	67	0.02
Gornostaeva 1994		52	-0.13	41	0.00	59	0.04	63	0.04	90	0.01	71	0.02
Groot 1988		66	-0.16	19	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.13	91	0.01	43	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		48	-0.13	86	0.00	47	0.04	53	0.04	91	0.01	75	0.02
Hatto 1993		43	-0.12	56	0.00	50	0.05	49	0.05	91	0.01	74	0.02
Hatto 1997		60	-0.15	67	0.00	68	0.04	55	0.04	91	0.01	65	0.02
Horowitz 1949		49	-0.13	34	0.00	43	0.06	42	0.14	90	0.01	39	0.04
Indjic 1988		46	-0.13	89	0.00	53	0.04	54	0.04	91	0.01	61	0.02
Kapell 1951		89	-0.22	83	0.00	87	0.01	89	0.01	91	0.01	83	0.01
Kissin 1993		50	-0.13	57	0.00	41	0.07	38	0.20	90	0.01	40	0.04
Kushner 1989		38	-0.11	87	0.00	54	0.04	52	0.04	91	0.01	58	0.02
Luisada 1991		76	-0.19	76	0.00	86	0.02	85	0.02	91	0.01	76	0.01
Lushtak 2004		71	-0.18	70	0.00	62	0.04	65	0.04	91	0.01	68	0.02
Malcuzynski 1961		26	-0.10	16	0.00	22	0.07	22	0.36	90	0.01	22	0.06
Magaloff 1978		54	-0.14	40	0.00	61	0.04	61	0.04	90	0.01	55	0.02
Magin 1975		35	-0.11	39	0.00	24	0.06	35	0.25	91	0.01	33	0.05
Michalowski 1933		55	-0.14	59	0.00	38	0.07	37	0.23	91	0.01	35	0.05
Milkina 1970		36	-0.11	21	0.00	19	0.07	13	0.43	89	0.01	12	0.07
Mohovich 1999		69	-0.17	63	0.00	74	0.03	73	0.03	91	0.01	69	0.02
Moravec 1969		74	-0.18	30	0.00	65	0.03	69	0.03	91	0.01	49	0.02
Morozova 2008		68	-0.16	77	0.00	58	0.03	67	0.03	91	0.01	63	0.02
Neighaus 1950		65	-0.15	61	0.00	57	0.04	56	0.04	91	0.01	73	0.02
Niedzielski 1931		27	-0.10	13	0.01	17	0.09	33	0.26	90	0.02	11	0.07
Ohlsson 1999		56	-0.14	51	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.12	91	0.01	46	0.03
Osinska 1989		87	-0.21	78	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	91	0.01	77	0.01
Pachmann 1927		29	-0.10	4	0.07	11	0.13	7	0.48	90	0.01	15	0.07
Paderewski 1930		91	-0.22	58	0.00	80	0.02	82	0.02	91	0.01	84	0.01
Perlemuter 1992		33	-0.11	71	0.00	48	0.04	51	0.04	89	0.01	52	0.02
Pierdomenico 2008		83	-0.20	32	0.00	90	0.01	88	0.01	91	0.01	81	0.01
Poblocka 1999		51	-0.13	53	0.00	56	0.04	59	0.04	91	0.01	53	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		90	-0.22	22	0.00	81	0.02	83	0.02	91	0.01	82	0.01
Rachmaninoff 1923		72	-0.18	27	0.00	60	0.04	58	0.04	90	0.01	56	0.02
Rangell 2001		32	-0.11	82	0.00	34	0.06	32	0.26	91	0.01	38	0.05
Richter 1976		9	-0.06	7	0.03	9	0.12	9	0.47	90	0.02	3	0.10
Rosen 1989		82	-0.20	68	0.00	73	0.02	78	0.02	91	0.01	89	0.01
Rosenthal 1930		23	-0.10	54	0.00	30	0.06	20	0.36	90	0.01	27	0.06
Rosenthal 1931		21	-0.09	37	0.00	27	0.07	17	0.37	90	0.01	23	0.06
Rosenthal 1931b		15	-0.08	46	0.00	26	0.07	19	0.37	90	0.02	6	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		30	-0.10	28	0.00	29	0.07	21	0.36	90	0.01	30	0.06
Rosenthal 1931d		25	-0.10	52	0.00	32	0.07	30	0.28	90	0.02	20	0.07
Rossi 2007		42	-0.12	9	0.03	16	0.07	40	0.15	90	0.02	31	0.05
Rubinstein 1939		34	-0.11	23	0.00	37	0.07	36	0.24	90	0.01	32	0.05
Rubinstein 1952		41	-0.12	69	0.00	40	0.07	39	0.19	90	0.01	44	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		73	-0.18	60	0.00	77	0.02	79	0.02	91	0.01	85	0.01
Schilhawsky 1960		8	-0.06	64	0.00	28	0.06	23	0.35	90	0.02	9	0.08
Shebanova 2002		18	-0.08	12	0.01	33	0.06	26	0.32	91	0.01	26	0.06
Smith 1975		88	-0.21	90	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01	80	0.01
Sokolov 2002		20	-0.09	6	0.04	12	0.17	8	0.48	91	0.01	10	0.07
Sztompka 1959		81	-0.20	43	0.00	75	0.03	74	0.03	91	0.01	60	0.02
Tomsic 1995		22	-0.09	36	0.00	35	0.07	31	0.27	90	0.02	14	0.07
Uninsky 1932		19	-0.08	47	0.00	14	0.10	18	0.37	90	0.01	25	0.06
Uninsky 1971		5	-0.02	8	0.03	7	0.15	2	0.59	89	0.01	8	0.08
Wasowski 1980		62	-0.15	20	0.00	51	0.04	50	0.04	90	0.01	50	0.02
Zak 1937		37	-0.11	17	0.00	46	0.06	46	0.06	90	0.02	45	0.03
Zak 1951		45	-0.12	65	0.00	49	0.05	48	0.05	90	0.01	59	0.02
Average		75	-0.18	91	0.00	78	0.02	76	0.02	91	0.01	86	0.01
Random 1		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Random 2		2	0.05	2	0.21	2	0.38	1	0.71	1	0.59	1	0.65
Random 3		1	0.07	1	0.24	1	0.24	3	0.57	6	0.52	2	0.54

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).