Rosenthal 1931d

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		57	0.43	39	0.00	66	0.07	47	0.07	89	0.02	59	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		31	0.49	16	0.00	28	0.06	25	0.26	55	0.04	29	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		59	0.41	40	0.00	59	0.05	58	0.05	85	0.03	63	0.04
Bacha 2000		33	0.49	48	0.00	33	0.06	31	0.21	52	0.06	22	0.11
Badura 1965		85	0.22	12	0.00	82	0.02	89	0.02	80	0.03	89	0.02
Barbosa 1983		87	0.17	52	0.00	74	0.02	87	0.02	87	0.03	86	0.02
Biret 1990		25	0.51	44	0.00	40	0.06	38	0.14	81	0.04	41	0.07
Blet 2003		62	0.39	17	0.00	62	0.05	54	0.05	64	0.04	58	0.04
Block 1995		38	0.46	49	0.00	36	0.05	35	0.16	72	0.03	39	0.07
Blumental 1952		67	0.34	20	0.00	46	0.04	74	0.04	72	0.03	80	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		41	0.45	38	0.00	43	0.04	44	0.10	85	0.02	62	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		8	0.63	45	0.00	6	0.19	10	0.50	11	0.46	6	0.48
Bunin 1987		74	0.32	36	0.00	80	0.04	72	0.04	84	0.03	81	0.03
Bunin 1987b		75	0.31	57	0.00	79	0.03	80	0.03	84	0.03	70	0.03
Chiu 1999		78	0.29	68	0.00	47	0.04	70	0.04	88	0.03	68	0.03
Cohen 1997		70	0.33	26	0.00	35	0.05	32	0.18	20	0.30	12	0.23
Cortot 1951		63	0.38	77	0.00	81	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03	83	0.03
Csalog 1996		58	0.42	86	0.00	64	0.05	56	0.05	66	0.04	57	0.04
Czerny 1949		61	0.39	24	0.00	69	0.04	67	0.04	81	0.03	78	0.03
Czerny 1990		27	0.51	34	0.00	30	0.05	24	0.27	84	0.03	31	0.09
Duchoud 2007		65	0.37	46	0.00	68	0.04	65	0.04	85	0.03	79	0.03
Ezaki 2006		28	0.50	15	0.00	31	0.05	29	0.24	78	0.03	33	0.08
Falvay 1989		16	0.56	78	0.00	9	0.13	8	0.52	27	0.37	7	0.44
Farrell 1958		32	0.49	65	0.00	32	0.06	27	0.25	55	0.05	24	0.11
Ferenczy 1958		72	0.33	41	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	89	0.02	87	0.02
Fliere 1977		13	0.58	72	0.00	23	0.09	14	0.45	52	0.05	16	0.15
Fou 1978		23	0.53	9	0.00	14	0.13	11	0.49	46	0.07	14	0.19
Francois 1956		30	0.49	37	0.00	51	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04
Friedman 1923		88	0.17	35	0.00	88	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.04	84	0.03
Friedman 1923b		86	0.18	58	0.00	87	0.04	73	0.04	80	0.03	82	0.03
Friedman 1930		81	0.28	27	0.00	72	0.04	71	0.04	81	0.03	76	0.03
Garcia 2007		54	0.43	14	0.00	58	0.04	68	0.04	69	0.04	60	0.04
Garcia 2007b		69	0.33	29	0.00	45	0.04	45	0.08	65	0.04	47	0.06
Gierzod 1998		20	0.54	61	0.00	38	0.06	34	0.17	88	0.02	46	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		6	0.66	59	0.00	7	0.20	15	0.45	33	0.26	10	0.34
Groot 1988		29	0.50	53	0.00	25	0.06	26	0.26	81	0.03	32	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		60	0.41	87	0.00	22	0.07	22	0.30	58	0.04	28	0.11
Hatto 1993		84	0.26	88	0.00	76	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.03	90	0.02
Hatto 1997		80	0.28	4	0.00	75	0.03	82	0.03	88	0.03	77	0.03
Horowitz 1949		50	0.44	28	0.00	57	0.05	51	0.05	69	0.03	54	0.04
Indjic 1988		83	0.27	89	0.00	77	0.04	75	0.04	86	0.03	74	0.03
Kapell 1951		35	0.49	90	0.00	54	0.05	52	0.05	87	0.02	69	0.03
Kissin 1993		19	0.54	54	0.00	16	0.09	17	0.43	65	0.04	20	0.13
Kushner 1989		11	0.59	42	0.00	21	0.08	21	0.31	70	0.04	25	0.11
Luisada 1991		39	0.46	31	0.00	37	0.05	41	0.13	74	0.03	42	0.06
Lushtak 2004		71	0.33	69	0.00	49	0.05	59	0.05	80	0.03	61	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		10	0.60	5	0.00	18	0.08	19	0.34	55	0.04	21	0.12
Magaloff 1978		5	0.69	18	0.00	5	0.34	5	0.66	12	0.44	5	0.54
Magin 1975		17	0.56	60	0.00	15	0.08	18	0.42	58	0.04	19	0.13
Michalowski 1933		82	0.27	11	0.00	73	0.03	81	0.03	86	0.03	73	0.03
Milkina 1970		7	0.65	21	0.00	8	0.24	9	0.51	40	0.13	11	0.26
Mohovich 1999		18	0.55	79	0.00	26	0.08	23	0.30	72	0.04	26	0.11
Moravec 1969		15	0.57	22	0.00	12	0.11	13	0.46	18	0.39	8	0.42
Morozova 2008		64	0.38	50	0.00	56	0.05	53	0.05	89	0.02	75	0.03
Neighaus 1950		43	0.45	66	0.00	60	0.05	63	0.05	82	0.03	64	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		36	0.48	55	0.00	41	0.05	39	0.14	64	0.03	44	0.06
Ohlsson 1999		56	0.43	80	0.00	67	0.05	55	0.05	87	0.03	56	0.04
Osinska 1989		26	0.51	47	0.00	44	0.04	43	0.11	86	0.03	43	0.06
Pachmann 1927		45	0.45	62	0.00	48	0.05	57	0.05	34	0.14	35	0.08
Paderewski 1930		37	0.47	81	0.00	61	0.05	61	0.05	60	0.04	55	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		48	0.44	32	0.00	39	0.06	40	0.13	60	0.04	36	0.07
Pierdomenico 2008		53	0.43	82	0.00	42	0.04	42	0.11	61	0.04	37	0.07
Poblocka 1999		47	0.44	63	0.00	70	0.04	64	0.04	87	0.02	67	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		51	0.44	51	0.00	27	0.06	33	0.18	58	0.04	34	0.08
Rachmaninoff 1923		22	0.53	8	0.00	17	0.09	16	0.43	49	0.05	17	0.15
Rangell 2001		21	0.54	56	0.00	19	0.07	28	0.24	46	0.05	27	0.11
Richter 1976		68	0.34	74	0.00	71	0.04	69	0.04	69	0.03	71	0.03
Rosen 1989		14	0.57	10	0.00	20	0.09	20	0.32	78	0.03	30	0.10
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.76	6	0.00	4	0.41	4	0.82	4	0.81	4	0.81
Rosenthal 1931		2	0.95	2	0.06	2	0.91	2	0.97	2	0.97	2	0.97
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.97	1	0.91	1	0.90	1	0.98	2	0.99	1	0.98
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.86	3	0.01	3	0.85	3	0.94	2	0.93	3	0.93
Rosenthal 1931d		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rossi 2007		73	0.33	67	0.00	24	0.07	30	0.21	47	0.06	23	0.11
Rubinstein 1939		49	0.44	23	0.00	34	0.05	37	0.15	27	0.30	13	0.21
Rubinstein 1952		24	0.51	75	0.00	11	0.10	7	0.53	31	0.30	9	0.40
Rubinstein 1966		44	0.45	25	0.00	53	0.07	46	0.07	84	0.03	48	0.05
Schilhawsky 1960		52	0.44	7	0.00	29	0.08	36	0.16	78	0.03	38	0.07
Shebanova 2002		40	0.46	64	0.00	65	0.06	49	0.06	58	0.05	49	0.05
Smith 1975		12	0.58	19	0.00	13	0.12	12	0.49	55	0.05	15	0.16
Sokolov 2002		34	0.49	43	0.00	55	0.06	48	0.06	74	0.03	50	0.04
Sztompka 1959		66	0.35	83	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	87	0.03	72	0.03
Tomsic 1995		55	0.43	76	0.00	63	0.05	62	0.05	76	0.03	53	0.04
Uninsky 1932		79	0.29	73	0.00	85	0.02	84	0.02	80	0.03	88	0.02
Uninsky 1971		76	0.31	30	0.00	86	0.03	76	0.03	87	0.02	85	0.02
Wasowski 1980		77	0.30	84	0.00	83	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.04	66	0.03
Zak 1937		42	0.45	70	0.00	52	0.05	60	0.05	81	0.03	51	0.04
Zak 1951		46	0.44	13	0.00	50	0.06	50	0.06	87	0.03	52	0.04
Average		9	0.62	71	0.00	10	0.10	6	0.63	83	0.03	18	0.14
Random 1		90	-0.10	33	0.00	90	0.02	90	0.02	30	0.28	40	0.07
Random 2		89	-0.07	85	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	23	0.21	45	0.06
Random 3		91	-0.10	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	76	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).