Anderszewski 2003

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		59	0.29	13	0.01	67	0.04	64	0.04	66	0.04	73	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ashkenazy 1981		56	0.29	65	0.00	62	0.07	47	0.07	66	0.05	57	0.06
Bacha 2000		35	0.36	37	0.00	36	0.07	34	0.33	12	0.55	25	0.43
Badura 1965		14	0.42	17	0.00	15	0.11	16	0.57	4	0.62	12	0.59
Barbosa 1983		4	0.48	2	0.09	2	0.20	4	0.72	10	0.61	5	0.66
Biret 1990		70	0.25	75	0.00	71	0.03	85	0.03	61	0.04	88	0.03
Blet 2003		57	0.29	76	0.00	69	0.05	60	0.05	56	0.05	61	0.05
Block 1995		11	0.44	16	0.01	17	0.12	13	0.61	11	0.59	11	0.60
Blumental 1952		12	0.42	26	0.00	19	0.11	15	0.58	15	0.57	15	0.57
Boshniakovich 1969		23	0.40	4	0.03	3	0.15	7	0.67	13	0.58	9	0.62
Brailowsky 1960		9	0.45	10	0.01	12	0.14	11	0.63	3	0.76	3	0.69
Bunin 1987		71	0.25	72	0.00	75	0.03	77	0.03	76	0.03	86	0.03
Bunin 1987b		72	0.24	66	0.00	76	0.04	70	0.04	85	0.03	83	0.03
Chiu 1999		46	0.32	18	0.00	68	0.04	68	0.04	65	0.04	66	0.04
Cohen 1997		54	0.31	54	0.00	52	0.07	49	0.07	28	0.48	42	0.18
Cortot 1951		68	0.26	47	0.00	66	0.04	67	0.04	49	0.07	64	0.05
Csalog 1996		65	0.28	74	0.00	65	0.04	66	0.04	64	0.05	72	0.04
Czerny 1949		34	0.36	42	0.00	24	0.11	26	0.44	20	0.61	16	0.52
Czerny 1990		25	0.38	28	0.00	21	0.11	21	0.50	31	0.44	21	0.47
Duchoud 2007		78	0.22	31	0.00	64	0.03	74	0.03	56	0.06	74	0.04
Ezaki 2006		20	0.40	21	0.00	28	0.12	28	0.41	32	0.41	27	0.41
Falvay 1989		16	0.42	8	0.01	25	0.08	22	0.49	38	0.18	30	0.30
Farrell 1958		60	0.29	60	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	61	0.05	69	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		40	0.34	50	0.00	44	0.07	43	0.14	22	0.62	33	0.29
Fliere 1977		28	0.38	57	0.00	40	0.09	38	0.28	81	0.04	46	0.11
Fou 1978		3	0.48	11	0.01	7	0.21	5	0.70	11	0.61	6	0.65
Francois 1956		79	0.22	70	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	53	0.05	77	0.04
Friedman 1923		76	0.23	88	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	65	0.05	78	0.04
Friedman 1923b		80	0.22	77	0.00	82	0.03	75	0.03	74	0.04	87	0.03
Friedman 1930		75	0.23	84	0.00	77	0.03	72	0.03	86	0.03	85	0.03
Garcia 2007		55	0.30	71	0.00	42	0.10	41	0.21	19	0.41	34	0.29
Garcia 2007b		73	0.24	46	0.00	34	0.08	42	0.19	29	0.26	39	0.22
Gierzod 1998		6	0.46	7	0.02	5	0.20	2	0.75	4	0.68	2	0.71
Gornostaeva 1994		21	0.40	23	0.00	23	0.11	18	0.52	19	0.53	17	0.52
Groot 1988		61	0.29	61	0.00	53	0.07	50	0.07	58	0.05	58	0.06
Harasiewicz 1955		2	0.49	29	0.00	8	0.20	3	0.72	18	0.48	13	0.59
Hatto 1993		18	0.42	27	0.00	26	0.10	19	0.52	38	0.17	31	0.30
Hatto 1997		30	0.38	19	0.00	30	0.10	30	0.38	38	0.14	38	0.23
Horowitz 1949		81	0.21	73	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	79	0.03	84	0.03
Indjic 1988		26	0.38	82	0.00	29	0.08	29	0.40	44	0.13	37	0.23
Kapell 1951		17	0.42	49	0.00	13	0.13	12	0.61	15	0.41	18	0.50
Kissin 1993		37	0.36	51	0.00	39	0.08	35	0.33	37	0.37	29	0.35
Kushner 1989		8	0.46	3	0.06	4	0.16	8	0.67	13	0.54	10	0.60
Luisada 1991		64	0.29	81	0.00	63	0.04	71	0.04	65	0.06	59	0.05
Lushtak 2004		13	0.42	15	0.01	11	0.20	10	0.64	8	0.63	8	0.63
Malcuzynski 1961		27	0.38	43	0.00	16	0.13	17	0.55	29	0.35	23	0.44
Magaloff 1978		52	0.31	33	0.00	60	0.06	56	0.06	84	0.03	67	0.04
Magin 1975		49	0.31	22	0.00	56	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.04	68	0.04
Michalowski 1933		85	0.16	44	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	78	0.03	89	0.02
Milkina 1970		5	0.47	6	0.02	6	0.21	6	0.70	11	0.66	4	0.68
Mohovich 1999		7	0.46	25	0.00	9	0.23	9	0.66	10	0.64	7	0.65
Moravec 1969		22	0.40	45	0.00	27	0.13	20	0.51	19	0.37	26	0.43
Morozova 2008		32	0.37	56	0.00	41	0.10	39	0.25	53	0.05	47	0.11
Neighaus 1950		62	0.29	62	0.00	58	0.05	61	0.05	55	0.05	63	0.05
Niedzielski 1931		63	0.29	63	0.00	50	0.07	48	0.07	60	0.05	52	0.06
Ohlsson 1999		24	0.38	14	0.01	20	0.11	31	0.36	36	0.24	32	0.29
Osinska 1989		42	0.34	34	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.29	58	0.05	45	0.12
Pachmann 1927		84	0.17	78	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	64	0.05	71	0.04
Paderewski 1930		83	0.18	55	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	57	0.05	70	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		82	0.20	79	0.00	84	0.03	73	0.03	77	0.04	79	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		86	0.12	85	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	74	0.04	82	0.03
Poblocka 1999		19	0.41	48	0.00	22	0.13	23	0.49	26	0.45	20	0.47
Rabcewiczowa 1932		58	0.29	38	0.00	47	0.07	46	0.07	43	0.13	49	0.10
Rachmaninoff 1923		77	0.23	80	0.00	78	0.04	69	0.04	78	0.03	81	0.03
Rangell 2001		44	0.33	41	0.00	32	0.08	32	0.35	21	0.49	28	0.41
Richter 1976		29	0.38	35	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.29	39	0.21	36	0.25
Rosen 1989		50	0.31	52	0.00	54	0.05	57	0.05	74	0.03	76	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		69	0.26	64	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	47	0.06	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		31	0.37	32	0.00	35	0.10	33	0.35	11	0.71	19	0.50
Rosenthal 1931b		45	0.33	67	0.00	46	0.07	54	0.07	13	0.62	41	0.21
Rosenthal 1931c		47	0.32	9	0.01	59	0.05	58	0.05	29	0.25	48	0.11
Rosenthal 1931d		74	0.23	58	0.00	70	0.04	65	0.04	32	0.23	50	0.10
Rossi 2007		87	0.12	89	0.00	87	0.03	76	0.03	57	0.05	65	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		10	0.44	12	0.01	14	0.12	14	0.59	10	0.55	14	0.57
Rubinstein 1952		33	0.37	53	0.00	31	0.09	27	0.41	41	0.21	35	0.29
Rubinstein 1966		1	0.57	1	0.62	1	0.61	1	0.86	2	0.78	1	0.82
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.34	20	0.00	45	0.07	51	0.07	30	0.26	44	0.13
Shebanova 2002		48	0.31	68	0.00	51	0.07	53	0.07	57	0.06	56	0.06
Smith 1975		36	0.36	30	0.00	43	0.06	44	0.14	32	0.31	40	0.21
Sokolov 2002		66	0.27	86	0.00	72	0.03	83	0.03	68	0.04	80	0.03
Sztompka 1959		53	0.31	36	0.00	33	0.09	40	0.24	44	0.12	43	0.17
Tomsic 1995		38	0.35	5	0.02	10	0.14	25	0.47	13	0.46	22	0.46
Uninsky 1932		67	0.26	59	0.00	61	0.06	55	0.06	48	0.06	55	0.06
Uninsky 1971		15	0.42	24	0.00	18	0.14	24	0.48	25	0.41	24	0.44
Wasowski 1980		51	0.31	90	0.00	55	0.05	59	0.05	51	0.06	60	0.05
Zak 1937		43	0.33	40	0.00	49	0.07	52	0.07	55	0.05	53	0.06
Zak 1951		39	0.35	39	0.00	48	0.08	45	0.08	57	0.05	54	0.06
Random 1		89	0.00	69	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	25	0.34	51	0.08
Random 2		88	0.00	87	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	55	0.05	90	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.04	83	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	26	0.25	62	0.05

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).