Bacha 2000

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		27	0.32	32	0.00	27	0.06	40	0.15	60	0.04	43	0.08
Anderszewski 2003		17	0.36	18	0.01	12	0.17	12	0.55	34	0.33	6	0.43
Ashkenazy 1981		2	0.45	10	0.02	7	0.17	3	0.69	21	0.49	2	0.58
Bacha 2000		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Badura 1965		39	0.30	21	0.00	23	0.06	24	0.30	32	0.20	19	0.24
Barbosa 1983		23	0.34	69	0.00	30	0.07	26	0.28	50	0.07	29	0.14
Biret 1990		56	0.27	66	0.00	78	0.03	75	0.03	79	0.03	83	0.03
Blet 2003		67	0.24	50	0.00	57	0.04	61	0.04	64	0.04	67	0.04
Block 1995		54	0.27	48	0.00	46	0.05	51	0.05	76	0.03	70	0.04
Blumental 1952		1	0.47	1	0.26	1	0.26	1	0.78	14	0.58	1	0.67
Boshniakovich 1969		37	0.30	49	0.00	52	0.06	50	0.06	75	0.04	54	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		19	0.34	42	0.00	19	0.10	19	0.39	28	0.39	8	0.39
Bunin 1987		70	0.24	39	0.00	72	0.04	66	0.04	82	0.03	80	0.03
Bunin 1987b		66	0.24	64	0.00	71	0.04	60	0.04	76	0.03	76	0.03
Chiu 1999		30	0.32	17	0.01	25	0.06	33	0.21	44	0.11	27	0.15
Cohen 1997		43	0.30	76	0.00	42	0.07	36	0.20	34	0.34	18	0.26
Cortot 1951		42	0.30	44	0.00	43	0.08	34	0.21	20	0.44	15	0.30
Csalog 1996		87	0.14	71	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	79	0.03	88	0.02
Czerny 1949		38	0.30	38	0.00	39	0.05	39	0.18	47	0.07	39	0.11
Czerny 1990		57	0.26	53	0.00	54	0.05	55	0.05	59	0.05	55	0.05
Duchoud 2007		62	0.26	43	0.00	59	0.04	70	0.04	81	0.04	68	0.04
Ezaki 2006		3	0.44	9	0.03	6	0.13	6	0.65	26	0.46	4	0.55
Falvay 1989		14	0.37	26	0.00	24	0.07	29	0.27	52	0.05	36	0.12
Farrell 1958		65	0.25	45	0.00	68	0.04	62	0.04	67	0.04	61	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		48	0.29	30	0.00	56	0.05	53	0.05	37	0.34	33	0.13
Fliere 1977		52	0.28	56	0.00	31	0.07	44	0.12	68	0.04	46	0.07
Fou 1978		11	0.39	7	0.04	11	0.20	13	0.54	34	0.27	10	0.38
Francois 1956		68	0.24	37	0.00	40	0.06	43	0.14	37	0.17	28	0.15
Friedman 1923		79	0.18	86	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	82	0.03	84	0.03
Friedman 1923b		81	0.18	87	0.00	75	0.03	79	0.03	85	0.03	81	0.03
Friedman 1930		80	0.18	89	0.00	80	0.03	78	0.03	69	0.04	77	0.03
Garcia 2007		73	0.23	72	0.00	70	0.04	65	0.04	65	0.05	69	0.04
Garcia 2007b		61	0.26	47	0.00	63	0.04	69	0.04	75	0.04	71	0.04
Gierzod 1998		4	0.43	6	0.05	3	0.14	2	0.72	18	0.44	3	0.56
Gornostaeva 1994		72	0.24	33	0.00	76	0.03	82	0.03	74	0.03	82	0.03
Groot 1988		32	0.31	59	0.00	44	0.08	41	0.15	57	0.05	41	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		26	0.33	11	0.02	21	0.10	18	0.40	64	0.05	32	0.14
Hatto 1993		6	0.41	2	0.16	2	0.17	9	0.59	34	0.20	12	0.34
Hatto 1997		10	0.40	22	0.00	13	0.17	16	0.49	46	0.06	24	0.17
Horowitz 1949		77	0.19	84	0.00	82	0.04	68	0.04	63	0.04	62	0.04
Indjic 1988		7	0.41	35	0.00	9	0.20	10	0.58	45	0.09	20	0.23
Kapell 1951		15	0.36	14	0.01	16	0.24	15	0.49	42	0.09	21	0.21
Kissin 1993		46	0.29	67	0.00	50	0.05	54	0.05	57	0.06	52	0.05
Kushner 1989		5	0.43	4	0.06	5	0.12	5	0.65	35	0.24	9	0.39
Luisada 1991		69	0.24	77	0.00	69	0.04	59	0.04	76	0.04	57	0.04
Lushtak 2004		41	0.30	57	0.00	41	0.06	38	0.19	87	0.03	44	0.08
Malcuzynski 1961		8	0.40	5	0.06	8	0.17	8	0.61	47	0.07	22	0.21
Magaloff 1978		33	0.31	55	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.07	77	0.03	48	0.05
Magin 1975		76	0.22	88	0.00	67	0.05	58	0.05	75	0.04	59	0.04
Michalowski 1933		84	0.15	85	0.00	77	0.03	74	0.03	61	0.06	66	0.04
Milkina 1970		13	0.38	25	0.00	14	0.14	11	0.56	41	0.17	13	0.31
Mohovich 1999		22	0.34	40	0.00	20	0.09	20	0.38	54	0.05	31	0.14
Moravec 1969		47	0.29	75	0.00	53	0.06	48	0.06	71	0.04	47	0.05
Morozova 2008		16	0.36	12	0.01	15	0.15	14	0.53	38	0.22	11	0.34
Neighaus 1950		51	0.28	83	0.00	48	0.07	46	0.07	76	0.03	56	0.05
Niedzielski 1931		63	0.25	15	0.01	55	0.05	56	0.05	50	0.05	50	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		35	0.31	16	0.01	18	0.10	21	0.34	75	0.03	40	0.10
Osinska 1989		74	0.23	19	0.00	58	0.03	72	0.03	76	0.03	74	0.03
Pachmann 1927		64	0.25	36	0.00	66	0.04	64	0.04	60	0.05	64	0.04
Paderewski 1930		59	0.26	8	0.04	22	0.10	28	0.27	35	0.32	16	0.29
Perlemuter 1992		86	0.15	70	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	80	0.03	73	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		58	0.26	54	0.00	73	0.04	63	0.04	65	0.04	58	0.04
Poblocka 1999		78	0.18	41	0.00	81	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02	85	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		53	0.28	52	0.00	62	0.03	71	0.03	61	0.05	60	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		82	0.17	65	0.00	83	0.03	77	0.03	86	0.02	87	0.02
Rangell 2001		40	0.30	34	0.00	38	0.06	27	0.27	50	0.06	34	0.13
Richter 1976		50	0.29	62	0.00	64	0.05	57	0.05	81	0.04	63	0.04
Rosen 1989		49	0.29	60	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	78	0.03	79	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		75	0.22	74	0.00	79	0.03	83	0.03	69	0.04	78	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		44	0.30	24	0.00	34	0.07	32	0.21	25	0.44	14	0.30
Rosenthal 1931b		29	0.32	31	0.00	28	0.06	22	0.33	19	0.53	7	0.42
Rosenthal 1931c		31	0.32	13	0.01	36	0.06	42	0.15	54	0.05	42	0.09
Rosenthal 1931d		60	0.26	51	0.00	51	0.05	52	0.05	26	0.30	37	0.12
Rossi 2007		85	0.15	78	0.00	87	0.03	81	0.03	77	0.02	86	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		20	0.34	23	0.00	17	0.13	17	0.47	34	0.16	17	0.27
Rubinstein 1952		36	0.31	63	0.00	37	0.05	31	0.22	74	0.03	45	0.08
Rubinstein 1966		9	0.40	20	0.00	10	0.18	4	0.66	62	0.06	23	0.20
Schilhawsky 1960		25	0.33	46	0.00	33	0.07	37	0.20	41	0.13	25	0.16
Shebanova 2002		18	0.35	81	0.00	29	0.06	23	0.32	54	0.06	30	0.14
Smith 1975		55	0.27	58	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	74	0.04	49	0.05
Sokolov 2002		24	0.34	29	0.00	35	0.05	35	0.20	45	0.07	35	0.12
Sztompka 1959		71	0.24	79	0.00	65	0.04	67	0.04	82	0.04	65	0.04
Tomsic 1995		21	0.34	27	0.00	32	0.07	30	0.25	61	0.05	38	0.11
Uninsky 1932		34	0.31	73	0.00	26	0.07	25	0.28	43	0.09	26	0.16
Uninsky 1971		12	0.38	3	0.11	4	0.13	7	0.64	32	0.33	5	0.46
Wasowski 1980		83	0.16	82	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	69	0.05	72	0.03
Zak 1937		45	0.30	68	0.00	60	0.03	76	0.03	70	0.04	75	0.03
Zak 1951		28	0.32	28	0.00	49	0.06	49	0.06	66	0.04	51	0.05
Random 1		90	-0.10	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	85	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		88	0.01	61	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	42	0.11	53	0.05
Random 3		89	-0.08	80	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	60	0.03	89	0.02

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).