Rosenthal 1931c

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		39	0.50	34	0.00	38	0.06	40	0.17	62	0.04	39	0.08
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.49	38	0.00	21	0.07	35	0.21	50	0.04	35	0.09
Ashkenazy 1981		51	0.47	52	0.00	52	0.04	52	0.04	64	0.04	58	0.04
Bacha 2000		66	0.40	48	0.00	69	0.03	80	0.03	68	0.04	61	0.03
Badura 1965		76	0.36	57	0.00	36	0.06	41	0.14	61	0.04	44	0.07
Barbosa 1983		88	0.20	84	0.00	72	0.03	68	0.03	83	0.03	71	0.03
Biret 1990		38	0.50	85	0.00	46	0.04	56	0.04	87	0.03	80	0.03
Blet 2003		46	0.48	40	0.00	61	0.04	54	0.04	84	0.03	72	0.03
Block 1995		77	0.36	28	0.00	65	0.03	67	0.03	86	0.02	89	0.02
Blumental 1952		58	0.43	6	0.01	26	0.07	34	0.22	61	0.04	37	0.09
Boshniakovich 1969		42	0.48	77	0.00	49	0.03	74	0.03	87	0.02	90	0.02
Brailowsky 1960		47	0.48	58	0.00	48	0.03	72	0.03	69	0.04	62	0.03
Bunin 1987		63	0.41	90	0.00	74	0.05	46	0.05	69	0.04	59	0.04
Bunin 1987b		64	0.41	64	0.00	73	0.03	79	0.03	70	0.04	66	0.03
Chiu 1999		87	0.21	26	0.00	70	0.03	82	0.03	82	0.03	63	0.03
Cohen 1997		79	0.31	63	0.00	63	0.04	51	0.04	26	0.23	32	0.10
Cortot 1951		32	0.52	50	0.00	51	0.05	49	0.05	60	0.05	50	0.05
Csalog 1996		48	0.47	22	0.00	66	0.04	60	0.04	50	0.05	56	0.04
Czerny 1949		31	0.53	53	0.00	37	0.07	29	0.28	43	0.08	18	0.15
Czerny 1990		14	0.60	23	0.00	9	0.15	9	0.56	55	0.05	12	0.17
Duchoud 2007		56	0.44	91	0.00	55	0.04	53	0.04	77	0.03	77	0.03
Ezaki 2006		23	0.55	45	0.00	14	0.10	12	0.50	52	0.05	13	0.16
Falvay 1989		27	0.55	15	0.00	11	0.10	14	0.47	29	0.36	8	0.41
Farrell 1958		49	0.47	16	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.11	72	0.04	42	0.07
Ferenczy 1958		59	0.42	37	0.00	75	0.02	84	0.02	70	0.04	74	0.03
Fliere 1977		9	0.64	55	0.00	15	0.12	11	0.53	69	0.03	22	0.13
Fou 1978		44	0.48	24	0.00	28	0.07	26	0.31	48	0.06	21	0.14
Francois 1956		25	0.55	59	0.00	33	0.08	24	0.33	61	0.04	29	0.11
Friedman 1923		86	0.26	78	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	54	0.06	60	0.04
Friedman 1923b		85	0.26	39	0.00	79	0.02	87	0.02	54	0.06	79	0.03
Friedman 1930		70	0.39	71	0.00	58	0.04	55	0.04	51	0.05	57	0.04
Garcia 2007		73	0.38	73	0.00	78	0.03	76	0.03	80	0.03	78	0.03
Garcia 2007b		84	0.27	68	0.00	84	0.03	75	0.03	83	0.03	83	0.03
Gierzod 1998		10	0.62	51	0.00	22	0.08	19	0.42	55	0.04	24	0.13
Gornostaeva 1994		6	0.67	33	0.00	6	0.15	5	0.67	18	0.39	6	0.51
Groot 1988		43	0.48	69	0.00	34	0.06	38	0.18	73	0.03	45	0.07
Harasiewicz 1955		72	0.38	79	0.00	19	0.08	31	0.27	77	0.03	38	0.09
Hatto 1993		83	0.29	27	0.00	86	0.03	77	0.03	78	0.03	82	0.03
Hatto 1997		80	0.31	29	0.00	85	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.03	87	0.02
Horowitz 1949		61	0.42	60	0.00	77	0.03	78	0.03	86	0.02	85	0.02
Indjic 1988		81	0.30	88	0.00	87	0.03	73	0.03	82	0.03	70	0.03
Kapell 1951		15	0.60	31	0.00	32	0.06	30	0.28	77	0.04	26	0.11
Kissin 1993		18	0.57	9	0.00	16	0.08	17	0.43	58	0.05	17	0.15
Kushner 1989		11	0.62	46	0.00	23	0.08	21	0.40	68	0.04	23	0.13
Luisada 1991		67	0.40	81	0.00	43	0.04	44	0.08	73	0.04	46	0.06
Lushtak 2004		60	0.42	35	0.00	35	0.06	32	0.25	76	0.03	36	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		8	0.65	19	0.00	10	0.15	18	0.43	17	0.33	10	0.38
Magaloff 1978		5	0.69	11	0.00	5	0.24	7	0.64	16	0.41	5	0.51
Magin 1975		22	0.55	8	0.01	30	0.06	28	0.30	68	0.03	34	0.09
Michalowski 1933		69	0.40	21	0.00	59	0.04	62	0.04	67	0.05	55	0.04
Milkina 1970		12	0.62	44	0.00	24	0.12	16	0.45	55	0.05	16	0.15
Mohovich 1999		24	0.55	70	0.00	27	0.08	20	0.40	86	0.03	28	0.11
Moravec 1969		17	0.59	18	0.00	13	0.11	13	0.49	13	0.44	7	0.46
Morozova 2008		57	0.43	20	0.00	39	0.07	39	0.18	87	0.02	47	0.06
Neighaus 1950		40	0.49	72	0.00	47	0.03	70	0.03	73	0.04	81	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		35	0.50	25	0.00	54	0.04	59	0.04	83	0.03	64	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.50	5	0.01	45	0.05	43	0.09	54	0.05	43	0.07
Osinska 1989		21	0.56	62	0.00	41	0.09	36	0.20	48	0.05	30	0.10
Pachmann 1927		68	0.40	82	0.00	71	0.03	71	0.03	53	0.05	54	0.04
Paderewski 1930		20	0.56	65	0.00	31	0.06	37	0.19	48	0.05	31	0.10
Perlemuter 1992		55	0.46	17	0.00	29	0.10	23	0.35	64	0.04	25	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		71	0.38	80	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	82	0.02	84	0.02
Poblocka 1999		28	0.54	47	0.00	56	0.04	57	0.04	64	0.04	52	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		30	0.53	42	0.00	18	0.09	27	0.31	46	0.06	20	0.14
Rachmaninoff 1923		29	0.54	13	0.00	12	0.12	10	0.54	56	0.04	15	0.15
Rangell 2001		34	0.50	89	0.00	44	0.03	45	0.07	85	0.03	49	0.05
Richter 1976		74	0.37	54	0.00	76	0.02	85	0.02	76	0.03	86	0.02
Rosen 1989		19	0.56	61	0.00	40	0.06	33	0.23	75	0.03	40	0.08
Rosenthal 1930		3	0.87	2	0.20	3	0.46	4	0.90	1	0.89	4	0.89
Rosenthal 1931		1	0.87	1	0.55	1	0.54	3	0.92	3	0.94	2	0.93
Rosenthal 1931b		2	0.87	4	0.07	2	0.46	1	0.93	3	0.95	1	0.94
Rosenthal 1931c		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931d		4	0.86	3	0.11	4	0.81	2	0.93	3	0.94	3	0.93
Rossi 2007		82	0.29	12	0.00	53	0.05	48	0.05	40	0.15	33	0.09
Rubinstein 1939		65	0.40	36	0.00	68	0.03	65	0.03	37	0.18	41	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		36	0.50	14	0.00	25	0.07	22	0.37	33	0.26	11	0.31
Rubinstein 1966		50	0.47	66	0.00	60	0.03	63	0.03	72	0.04	73	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		26	0.55	7	0.01	17	0.08	25	0.32	63	0.04	27	0.11
Shebanova 2002		45	0.48	49	0.00	67	0.03	64	0.03	84	0.03	76	0.03
Smith 1975		13	0.62	10	0.00	8	0.27	8	0.63	30	0.25	9	0.40
Sokolov 2002		16	0.60	56	0.00	20	0.09	15	0.47	57	0.04	19	0.14
Sztompka 1959		33	0.52	41	0.00	50	0.03	66	0.03	75	0.04	68	0.03
Tomsic 1995		52	0.47	75	0.00	62	0.05	50	0.05	67	0.04	53	0.04
Uninsky 1932		78	0.36	67	0.00	83	0.03	69	0.03	76	0.04	75	0.03
Uninsky 1971		62	0.41	43	0.00	82	0.02	88	0.02	77	0.04	69	0.03
Wasowski 1980		75	0.36	30	0.00	88	0.04	61	0.04	54	0.05	51	0.04
Zak 1937		53	0.46	86	0.00	64	0.05	47	0.05	88	0.02	65	0.03
Zak 1951		54	0.46	76	0.00	57	0.04	58	0.04	82	0.03	67	0.03
Average		7	0.67	32	0.00	7	0.18	6	0.67	72	0.04	14	0.16
Random 1		91	-0.10	74	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	21	0.36	48	0.06
Random 2		89	-0.06	87	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	58	0.04	88	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.10	83	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	77	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).