Gornostaeva 1994

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		56	0.33	69	0.00	53	0.06	50	0.06	48	0.05	67	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		26	0.40	18	0.00	24	0.16	19	0.53	18	0.52	15	0.52
Ashkenazy 1981		74	0.28	82	0.00	81	0.03	85	0.03	72	0.05	79	0.04
Bacha 2000		83	0.24	31	0.00	83	0.03	74	0.03	82	0.03	81	0.03
Badura 1965		72	0.28	76	0.00	64	0.05	56	0.05	52	0.04	78	0.04
Barbosa 1983		43	0.36	62	0.00	49	0.08	47	0.08	65	0.06	50	0.07
Biret 1990		16	0.43	60	0.00	25	0.12	21	0.49	16	0.57	14	0.53
Blet 2003		73	0.28	38	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	58	0.04	87	0.03
Block 1995		28	0.40	50	0.00	29	0.09	23	0.47	32	0.30	27	0.38
Blumental 1952		65	0.30	80	0.00	65	0.05	59	0.05	65	0.05	68	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		25	0.41	37	0.00	9	0.14	18	0.53	29	0.30	26	0.40
Brailowsky 1960		52	0.34	61	0.00	54	0.06	52	0.06	62	0.05	62	0.05
Bunin 1987		55	0.33	30	0.00	55	0.05	58	0.05	49	0.06	70	0.05
Bunin 1987b		57	0.32	63	0.00	60	0.05	60	0.05	50	0.06	64	0.05
Chiu 1999		53	0.34	26	0.00	59	0.04	64	0.04	55	0.05	71	0.04
Cohen 1997		24	0.41	11	0.01	18	0.13	24	0.46	7	0.63	12	0.54
Cortot 1951		32	0.39	13	0.01	16	0.08	32	0.36	14	0.55	23	0.44
Csalog 1996		29	0.40	24	0.00	33	0.11	35	0.29	20	0.35	29	0.32
Czerny 1949		5	0.51	3	0.09	5	0.23	6	0.66	7	0.77	5	0.71
Czerny 1990		51	0.34	45	0.00	40	0.06	40	0.13	54	0.06	45	0.09
Duchoud 2007		59	0.31	85	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.09	35	0.22	40	0.14
Ezaki 2006		8	0.47	21	0.00	11	0.12	8	0.64	11	0.60	8	0.62
Falvay 1989		12	0.45	5	0.02	7	0.19	9	0.62	11	0.45	13	0.53
Farrell 1958		54	0.34	41	0.00	45	0.05	63	0.05	50	0.06	63	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		31	0.39	65	0.00	35	0.10	34	0.32	9	0.73	19	0.48
Fliere 1977		13	0.44	32	0.00	28	0.09	26	0.44	49	0.07	37	0.18
Fou 1978		36	0.39	42	0.00	48	0.08	46	0.08	55	0.05	54	0.06
Francois 1956		11	0.45	9	0.01	14	0.07	14	0.55	4	0.76	7	0.65
Friedman 1923		76	0.26	79	0.00	72	0.03	76	0.03	39	0.14	60	0.06
Friedman 1923b		78	0.25	46	0.00	73	0.04	65	0.04	44	0.11	53	0.07
Friedman 1930		64	0.30	36	0.00	41	0.05	43	0.09	54	0.06	51	0.07
Garcia 2007		66	0.30	72	0.00	42	0.04	42	0.09	60	0.05	52	0.07
Garcia 2007b		69	0.29	66	0.00	75	0.02	87	0.02	73	0.04	90	0.03
Gierzod 1998		21	0.42	14	0.01	12	0.11	12	0.59	17	0.46	16	0.52
Gornostaeva 1994		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Groot 1988		48	0.35	16	0.01	26	0.08	31	0.36	37	0.19	31	0.26
Harasiewicz 1955		6	0.49	19	0.00	6	0.15	5	0.68	21	0.45	11	0.55
Hatto 1993		61	0.31	83	0.00	66	0.05	57	0.05	83	0.03	80	0.04
Hatto 1997		39	0.38	86	0.00	43	0.05	41	0.09	65	0.04	59	0.06
Horowitz 1949		81	0.24	81	0.00	85	0.03	73	0.03	77	0.03	84	0.03
Indjic 1988		75	0.28	89	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	80	0.04	86	0.03
Kapell 1951		45	0.36	48	0.00	38	0.06	38	0.17	71	0.05	43	0.09
Kissin 1993		77	0.25	88	0.00	84	0.04	69	0.04	49	0.08	57	0.06
Kushner 1989		22	0.42	44	0.00	31	0.11	25	0.46	69	0.05	39	0.15
Luisada 1991		49	0.35	51	0.00	62	0.05	62	0.05	62	0.06	61	0.05
Lushtak 2004		34	0.39	39	0.00	36	0.10	36	0.26	35	0.14	36	0.19
Malcuzynski 1961		37	0.38	49	0.00	30	0.09	27	0.44	44	0.10	34	0.21
Magaloff 1978		10	0.46	6	0.02	19	0.10	17	0.54	20	0.39	20	0.46
Magin 1975		38	0.38	25	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.13	44	0.11	41	0.12
Michalowski 1933		86	0.22	57	0.00	86	0.03	84	0.03	44	0.11	56	0.06
Milkina 1970		18	0.42	15	0.01	8	0.17	11	0.61	18	0.57	9	0.59
Mohovich 1999		15	0.43	71	0.00	20	0.09	16	0.55	25	0.47	17	0.51
Moravec 1969		35	0.39	28	0.00	27	0.10	28	0.42	26	0.33	28	0.37
Morozova 2008		41	0.37	35	0.00	50	0.07	49	0.07	57	0.05	58	0.06
Neighaus 1950		17	0.42	10	0.01	17	0.12	22	0.48	19	0.42	22	0.45
Niedzielski 1931		82	0.24	55	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	70	0.04	83	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		40	0.38	40	0.00	46	0.06	51	0.06	76	0.03	75	0.04
Osinska 1989		1	0.60	1	0.44	1	0.44	1	0.84	2	0.80	2	0.82
Pachmann 1927		60	0.31	67	0.00	69	0.03	72	0.03	49	0.07	65	0.05
Paderewski 1930		87	0.20	23	0.00	82	0.03	86	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		23	0.42	34	0.00	32	0.12	33	0.35	13	0.52	24	0.43
Pierdomenico 2008		70	0.28	75	0.00	80	0.03	77	0.03	63	0.04	82	0.03
Poblocka 1999		30	0.40	56	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.21	43	0.16	38	0.18
Rabcewiczowa 1932		2	0.56	2	0.23	2	0.47	2	0.81	1	0.85	1	0.83
Rachmaninoff 1923		68	0.30	68	0.00	57	0.04	68	0.04	53	0.05	72	0.04
Rangell 2001		47	0.35	20	0.00	21	0.12	30	0.36	23	0.48	25	0.42
Richter 1976		42	0.36	53	0.00	58	0.04	66	0.04	66	0.05	74	0.04
Rosen 1989		3	0.54	8	0.01	3	0.39	3	0.78	4	0.69	4	0.73
Rosenthal 1930		44	0.36	90	0.00	47	0.08	45	0.08	24	0.55	35	0.21
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.25	64	0.00	78	0.03	75	0.03	41	0.19	48	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		84	0.23	73	0.00	76	0.03	81	0.03	36	0.25	47	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		67	0.30	54	0.00	56	0.05	61	0.05	27	0.28	42	0.12
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.22	43	0.00	71	0.03	83	0.03	27	0.30	46	0.09
Rossi 2007		33	0.39	17	0.01	51	0.07	48	0.07	3	0.65	33	0.21
Rubinstein 1939		20	0.42	12	0.01	15	0.08	20	0.51	20	0.42	21	0.46
Rubinstein 1952		19	0.42	47	0.00	22	0.16	15	0.55	29	0.45	18	0.50
Rubinstein 1966		14	0.44	27	0.00	23	0.14	13	0.56	45	0.09	32	0.22
Schilhawsky 1960		79	0.25	29	0.00	87	0.03	79	0.03	85	0.03	88	0.03
Shebanova 2002		62	0.30	58	0.00	77	0.03	70	0.03	55	0.06	76	0.04
Smith 1975		4	0.52	4	0.03	4	0.26	4	0.74	1	0.81	3	0.77
Sokolov 2002		7	0.48	7	0.02	10	0.11	10	0.62	3	0.70	6	0.66
Sztompka 1959		50	0.35	52	0.00	63	0.06	53	0.06	63	0.05	66	0.05
Tomsic 1995		46	0.35	77	0.00	52	0.05	54	0.05	47	0.08	55	0.06
Uninsky 1932		71	0.28	78	0.00	68	0.03	71	0.03	73	0.03	89	0.03
Uninsky 1971		9	0.47	22	0.00	13	0.10	7	0.65	13	0.52	10	0.58
Wasowski 1980		27	0.40	33	0.00	34	0.09	29	0.37	35	0.21	30	0.28
Zak 1937		63	0.30	87	0.00	67	0.04	67	0.04	56	0.05	73	0.04
Zak 1951		58	0.32	74	0.00	61	0.05	55	0.05	44	0.11	49	0.07
Random 1		89	0.02	84	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	17	0.41	44	0.09
Random 2		88	0.02	70	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	37	0.17	77	0.04
Random 3		90	-0.05	59	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	28	0.23	69	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).