Block 1995

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		82	0.21	64	0.00	77	0.03	75	0.03	82	0.03	85	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		9	0.44	27	0.00	18	0.10	11	0.59	13	0.61	7	0.60
Ashkenazy 1981		44	0.36	54	0.00	47	0.06	54	0.06	38	0.22	51	0.11
Bacha 2000		70	0.27	49	0.00	74	0.03	76	0.03	51	0.05	71	0.04
Badura 1965		57	0.34	66	0.00	59	0.05	57	0.05	21	0.34	49	0.13
Barbosa 1983		20	0.41	12	0.01	15	0.11	18	0.50	21	0.41	19	0.45
Biret 1990		68	0.28	61	0.00	75	0.04	62	0.04	54	0.05	79	0.04
Blet 2003		55	0.34	34	0.00	57	0.08	46	0.08	35	0.24	45	0.14
Block 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Blumental 1952		31	0.39	16	0.01	21	0.11	16	0.51	21	0.49	14	0.50
Boshniakovich 1969		24	0.40	35	0.00	22	0.10	20	0.49	27	0.32	23	0.40
Brailowsky 1960		12	0.44	7	0.03	8	0.12	17	0.51	14	0.63	10	0.57
Bunin 1987		69	0.28	75	0.00	69	0.04	70	0.04	54	0.06	70	0.05
Bunin 1987b		72	0.27	88	0.00	70	0.05	60	0.05	60	0.04	74	0.04
Chiu 1999		46	0.36	46	0.00	53	0.07	47	0.07	45	0.06	64	0.06
Cohen 1997		74	0.25	72	0.00	81	0.03	87	0.03	56	0.05	77	0.04
Cortot 1951		50	0.35	14	0.01	30	0.08	36	0.21	18	0.48	31	0.32
Csalog 1996		37	0.37	42	0.00	55	0.07	50	0.07	35	0.15	53	0.10
Czerny 1949		86	0.19	90	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	80	0.03	84	0.03
Czerny 1990		41	0.37	80	0.00	43	0.07	42	0.13	45	0.08	56	0.10
Duchoud 2007		85	0.19	65	0.00	85	0.03	83	0.03	72	0.04	86	0.03
Ezaki 2006		21	0.41	28	0.00	28	0.10	29	0.32	35	0.40	28	0.36
Falvay 1989		23	0.40	24	0.00	17	0.11	15	0.52	26	0.34	21	0.42
Farrell 1958		81	0.21	73	0.00	82	0.03	86	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		64	0.31	25	0.00	48	0.05	58	0.05	27	0.55	42	0.17
Fliere 1977		1	0.53	2	0.23	2	0.34	2	0.79	10	0.65	2	0.72
Fou 1978		8	0.44	22	0.00	9	0.11	6	0.65	17	0.52	8	0.58
Francois 1956		83	0.20	68	0.00	87	0.04	72	0.04	82	0.03	87	0.03
Friedman 1923		28	0.40	23	0.00	37	0.07	34	0.26	15	0.54	27	0.37
Friedman 1923b		26	0.40	62	0.00	32	0.08	28	0.35	17	0.55	20	0.44
Friedman 1930		45	0.36	57	0.00	52	0.06	52	0.06	41	0.12	61	0.08
Garcia 2007		48	0.36	70	0.00	40	0.06	43	0.12	20	0.40	37	0.22
Garcia 2007b		80	0.22	81	0.00	78	0.03	74	0.03	74	0.04	88	0.03
Gierzod 1998		51	0.35	51	0.00	24	0.09	27	0.35	31	0.28	32	0.31
Gornostaeva 1994		25	0.40	36	0.00	33	0.08	32	0.30	23	0.47	25	0.38
Groot 1988		29	0.40	52	0.00	27	0.09	25	0.42	36	0.21	33	0.30
Harasiewicz 1955		2	0.53	4	0.10	4	0.22	3	0.74	15	0.52	5	0.62
Hatto 1993		40	0.37	74	0.00	41	0.07	40	0.16	56	0.07	52	0.11
Hatto 1997		71	0.27	82	0.00	62	0.04	66	0.04	80	0.04	76	0.04
Horowitz 1949		63	0.31	55	0.00	63	0.05	61	0.05	34	0.34	48	0.13
Indjic 1988		56	0.34	84	0.00	51	0.05	56	0.05	52	0.06	68	0.05
Kapell 1951		30	0.39	20	0.00	31	0.08	31	0.30	32	0.23	36	0.26
Kissin 1993		10	0.44	10	0.02	13	0.11	8	0.62	19	0.58	6	0.60
Kushner 1989		22	0.41	47	0.00	16	0.10	14	0.54	32	0.29	22	0.40
Luisada 1991		49	0.35	53	0.00	60	0.05	59	0.05	60	0.06	65	0.05
Lushtak 2004		14	0.43	32	0.00	19	0.09	24	0.47	21	0.47	17	0.47
Malcuzynski 1961		13	0.44	11	0.02	10	0.12	7	0.65	20	0.49	12	0.56
Magaloff 1978		7	0.47	21	0.00	7	0.11	21	0.48	15	0.48	16	0.48
Magin 1975		58	0.34	40	0.00	56	0.08	45	0.08	47	0.06	63	0.07
Michalowski 1933		75	0.25	69	0.00	65	0.04	73	0.04	60	0.06	67	0.05
Milkina 1970		78	0.23	89	0.00	76	0.04	67	0.04	61	0.05	73	0.04
Mohovich 1999		3	0.52	3	0.13	3	0.26	1	0.80	3	0.75	1	0.77
Moravec 1969		16	0.43	8	0.02	14	0.11	22	0.48	10	0.49	15	0.48
Morozova 2008		59	0.33	86	0.00	58	0.04	63	0.04	68	0.04	75	0.04
Neighaus 1950		43	0.36	5	0.04	29	0.09	33	0.26	28	0.32	35	0.29
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.34	67	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	24	0.34	44	0.14
Ohlsson 1999		33	0.39	30	0.00	25	0.09	26	0.41	25	0.32	30	0.36
Osinska 1989		11	0.44	18	0.01	26	0.12	23	0.48	31	0.30	24	0.38
Pachmann 1927		47	0.36	45	0.00	54	0.07	49	0.07	22	0.44	41	0.18
Paderewski 1930		77	0.23	59	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	42	0.21	59	0.09
Perlemuter 1992		32	0.39	13	0.01	36	0.07	35	0.26	12	0.52	26	0.37
Pierdomenico 2008		73	0.26	58	0.00	79	0.03	80	0.03	55	0.04	82	0.03
Poblocka 1999		4	0.51	1	0.26	1	0.25	5	0.68	3	0.69	3	0.68
Rabcewiczowa 1932		52	0.35	15	0.01	35	0.08	37	0.21	28	0.41	34	0.29
Rachmaninoff 1923		39	0.37	44	0.00	46	0.07	48	0.07	36	0.24	47	0.13
Rangell 2001		60	0.32	56	0.00	61	0.04	64	0.04	53	0.05	78	0.04
Richter 1976		6	0.48	29	0.00	11	0.10	10	0.59	20	0.56	11	0.57
Rosen 1989		18	0.42	17	0.01	20	0.09	12	0.57	17	0.39	18	0.47
Rosenthal 1930		65	0.30	77	0.00	73	0.03	77	0.03	33	0.32	54	0.10
Rosenthal 1931		76	0.25	50	0.00	72	0.03	84	0.03	28	0.42	50	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		87	0.19	31	0.00	84	0.03	82	0.03	52	0.05	81	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		66	0.30	43	0.00	68	0.04	71	0.04	31	0.24	57	0.10
Rosenthal 1931d		84	0.20	85	0.00	83	0.03	78	0.03	60	0.05	80	0.04
Rossi 2007		79	0.22	39	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	33	0.26	58	0.09
Rubinstein 1939		67	0.28	83	0.00	67	0.04	69	0.04	66	0.04	72	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		17	0.43	26	0.00	12	0.10	13	0.56	14	0.55	13	0.55
Rubinstein 1966		15	0.43	71	0.00	23	0.10	19	0.50	49	0.07	39	0.19
Schilhawsky 1960		62	0.31	78	0.00	71	0.03	81	0.03	45	0.08	69	0.05
Shebanova 2002		5	0.48	6	0.03	5	0.27	4	0.71	11	0.57	4	0.64
Smith 1975		61	0.32	79	0.00	64	0.04	65	0.04	46	0.07	66	0.05
Sokolov 2002		53	0.34	37	0.00	50	0.06	55	0.06	35	0.27	46	0.13
Sztompka 1959		19	0.41	9	0.02	6	0.12	9	0.61	17	0.55	9	0.58
Tomsic 1995		36	0.38	48	0.00	34	0.10	30	0.31	18	0.41	29	0.36
Uninsky 1932		35	0.38	19	0.01	38	0.08	39	0.17	33	0.22	40	0.19
Uninsky 1971		42	0.36	33	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.15	62	0.05	60	0.09
Wasowski 1980		38	0.37	41	0.00	45	0.06	53	0.06	44	0.09	62	0.07
Zak 1937		27	0.40	60	0.00	39	0.06	38	0.19	34	0.20	38	0.19
Zak 1951		34	0.39	38	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	35	0.19	43	0.15
Random 1		88	0.01	87	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	3	0.51	55	0.10
Random 2		89	-0.01	63	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	60	0.05	89	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.06	76	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	53	0.04	90	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).