Richter 1976

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		12	0.63	57	0.00	27	0.08	25	0.29	80	0.03	41	0.09
Anderszewski 2003		32	0.55	25	0.00	12	0.09	19	0.38	38	0.12	18	0.21
Ashkenazy 1981		39	0.52	18	0.01	23	0.06	23	0.31	51	0.05	27	0.12
Bacha 2000		81	0.29	77	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	88	0.02	83	0.02
Badura 1965		21	0.58	10	0.02	10	0.08	18	0.40	29	0.33	10	0.36
Barbosa 1983		74	0.35	56	0.00	76	0.02	87	0.02	85	0.03	87	0.02
Biret 1990		67	0.39	85	0.00	70	0.03	72	0.03	75	0.04	77	0.03
Blet 2003		24	0.57	40	0.00	51	0.06	52	0.06	56	0.05	55	0.05
Block 1995		13	0.62	22	0.01	17	0.08	28	0.28	30	0.24	13	0.26
Blumental 1952		88	0.16	52	0.00	88	0.03	80	0.03	88	0.02	88	0.02
Boshniakovich 1969		11	0.64	27	0.00	14	0.14	11	0.48	20	0.37	8	0.42
Brailowsky 1960		51	0.48	61	0.00	55	0.06	49	0.06	71	0.04	51	0.05
Bunin 1987		8	0.65	60	0.00	6	0.20	8	0.51	9	0.51	6	0.51
Bunin 1987b		9	0.65	7	0.03	5	0.19	7	0.51	10	0.51	5	0.51
Chiu 1999		72	0.36	66	0.00	56	0.06	53	0.06	63	0.04	52	0.05
Cohen 1997		85	0.22	26	0.00	73	0.03	79	0.03	56	0.04	76	0.03
Cortot 1951		30	0.55	36	0.00	48	0.06	51	0.06	47	0.07	50	0.06
Csalog 1996		69	0.37	32	0.00	40	0.05	44	0.11	45	0.10	35	0.10
Czerny 1949		27	0.56	86	0.00	26	0.08	32	0.23	52	0.06	26	0.12
Czerny 1990		44	0.51	82	0.00	59	0.05	60	0.05	74	0.03	63	0.04
Duchoud 2007		48	0.49	90	0.00	39	0.06	34	0.19	48	0.05	36	0.10
Ezaki 2006		20	0.58	71	0.00	34	0.05	33	0.23	65	0.04	31	0.10
Falvay 1989		63	0.41	24	0.00	75	0.02	86	0.02	78	0.04	68	0.03
Farrell 1958		68	0.38	84	0.00	77	0.02	85	0.02	71	0.04	70	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		29	0.55	16	0.01	33	0.09	37	0.15	33	0.20	20	0.17
Fliere 1977		5	0.67	31	0.00	9	0.14	6	0.54	48	0.05	21	0.16
Fou 1978		37	0.53	48	0.00	36	0.07	40	0.13	69	0.04	45	0.07
Francois 1956		66	0.39	69	0.00	82	0.03	71	0.03	66	0.04	81	0.03
Friedman 1923		87	0.22	72	0.00	85	0.02	82	0.02	77	0.04	82	0.03
Friedman 1923b		86	0.22	70	0.00	83	0.03	75	0.03	63	0.05	62	0.04
Friedman 1930		77	0.33	79	0.00	67	0.04	61	0.04	58	0.05	59	0.04
Garcia 2007		55	0.46	37	0.00	50	0.06	48	0.06	70	0.04	56	0.05
Garcia 2007b		82	0.26	55	0.00	68	0.05	58	0.05	78	0.03	65	0.04
Gierzod 1998		41	0.52	81	0.00	46	0.05	55	0.05	80	0.03	60	0.04
Gornostaeva 1994		53	0.47	43	0.00	62	0.03	68	0.03	83	0.02	89	0.02
Groot 1988		28	0.55	62	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.10	48	0.05	47	0.07
Harasiewicz 1955		3	0.68	2	0.16	2	0.26	3	0.59	11	0.45	3	0.52
Hatto 1993		61	0.42	30	0.00	31	0.06	26	0.29	35	0.16	16	0.22
Hatto 1997		58	0.45	21	0.01	21	0.06	22	0.31	53	0.05	25	0.12
Horowitz 1949		7	0.67	4	0.10	4	0.29	4	0.58	9	0.59	2	0.58
Indjic 1988		59	0.44	47	0.00	32	0.10	24	0.30	43	0.12	19	0.19
Kapell 1951		23	0.57	9	0.02	20	0.07	16	0.43	56	0.05	22	0.15
Kissin 1993		4	0.68	5	0.07	8	0.12	10	0.48	30	0.22	11	0.32
Kushner 1989		25	0.57	8	0.03	43	0.08	38	0.15	82	0.03	46	0.07
Luisada 1991		46	0.50	68	0.00	58	0.04	66	0.04	79	0.03	66	0.03
Lushtak 2004		31	0.55	39	0.00	18	0.07	29	0.27	64	0.04	37	0.10
Malcuzynski 1961		17	0.59	51	0.00	25	0.06	30	0.26	54	0.04	32	0.10
Magaloff 1978		57	0.46	65	0.00	64	0.04	65	0.04	87	0.02	67	0.03
Magin 1975		19	0.58	12	0.01	24	0.07	15	0.44	44	0.11	14	0.22
Michalowski 1933		64	0.40	78	0.00	47	0.05	54	0.05	55	0.06	54	0.05
Milkina 1970		38	0.53	34	0.00	54	0.06	50	0.06	76	0.04	53	0.05
Mohovich 1999		42	0.52	46	0.00	53	0.06	47	0.06	80	0.03	61	0.04
Moravec 1969		79	0.32	23	0.01	86	0.02	84	0.02	86	0.02	84	0.02
Morozova 2008		22	0.58	42	0.00	29	0.08	27	0.28	52	0.04	29	0.11
Neighaus 1950		36	0.54	64	0.00	30	0.06	20	0.33	63	0.04	30	0.11
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.46	19	0.01	44	0.06	43	0.12	49	0.04	44	0.07
Ohlsson 1999		49	0.49	59	0.00	38	0.05	31	0.26	62	0.04	34	0.10
Osinska 1989		45	0.51	49	0.00	60	0.05	59	0.05	82	0.03	57	0.04
Pachmann 1927		40	0.52	63	0.00	52	0.05	56	0.05	27	0.21	33	0.10
Paderewski 1930		56	0.46	33	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	88	0.02	72	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		14	0.62	17	0.01	16	0.11	17	0.42	34	0.16	12	0.26
Pierdomenico 2008		60	0.42	45	0.00	66	0.05	57	0.05	71	0.03	58	0.04
Poblocka 1999		1	0.72	3	0.10	3	0.24	1	0.64	14	0.40	4	0.51
Rabcewiczowa 1932		78	0.33	67	0.00	84	0.02	83	0.02	69	0.03	86	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		43	0.51	89	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.12	69	0.04	42	0.07
Rangell 2001		65	0.40	54	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	62	0.04	64	0.04
Richter 1976		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosen 1989		62	0.41	29	0.00	71	0.03	73	0.03	69	0.04	75	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		47	0.50	35	0.00	41	0.05	39	0.14	40	0.14	23	0.14
Rosenthal 1931		71	0.36	83	0.00	69	0.03	70	0.03	79	0.03	73	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		76	0.33	73	0.00	80	0.03	78	0.03	75	0.03	79	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		70	0.37	80	0.00	72	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.02	90	0.02
Rosenthal 1931d		75	0.34	87	0.00	81	0.03	69	0.03	69	0.04	78	0.03
Rossi 2007		84	0.25	88	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	86	0.03	85	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		83	0.26	6	0.03	22	0.07	42	0.12	74	0.04	43	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		80	0.31	13	0.01	74	0.03	77	0.03	65	0.04	80	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		73	0.35	53	0.00	79	0.03	74	0.03	83	0.03	74	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		2	0.71	1	0.21	1	0.21	2	0.64	3	0.55	1	0.59
Shebanova 2002		35	0.54	11	0.02	37	0.05	35	0.18	50	0.05	40	0.09
Smith 1975		52	0.48	38	0.00	63	0.04	63	0.04	80	0.03	69	0.03
Sokolov 2002		15	0.60	14	0.01	11	0.09	14	0.44	35	0.31	9	0.37
Sztompka 1959		33	0.55	20	0.01	49	0.08	46	0.08	64	0.05	48	0.06
Tomsic 1995		50	0.49	50	0.00	65	0.04	64	0.04	84	0.03	71	0.03
Uninsky 1932		34	0.54	74	0.00	35	0.05	36	0.17	58	0.05	39	0.09
Uninsky 1971		10	0.64	15	0.01	7	0.13	5	0.54	25	0.36	7	0.44
Wasowski 1980		18	0.58	41	0.00	28	0.07	21	0.31	72	0.04	28	0.11
Zak 1937		26	0.57	75	0.00	19	0.07	13	0.45	44	0.11	15	0.22
Zak 1951		16	0.59	91	0.00	15	0.12	12	0.47	43	0.09	17	0.21
Average		6	0.67	28	0.00	13	0.09	9	0.48	81	0.03	24	0.12
Random 1		89	-0.06	58	0.00	89	0.02	90	0.02	9	0.47	38	0.10
Random 2		91	-0.14	44	0.00	90	0.02	89	0.02	33	0.17	49	0.06
Random 3		90	-0.12	76	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	84	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).