Morozova 2008

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		35	0.39	44	0.00	42	0.06	43	0.13	19	0.48	35	0.25
Anderszewski 2003		47	0.37	81	0.00	46	0.05	53	0.05	39	0.25	55	0.11
Ashkenazy 1981		13	0.46	8	0.03	18	0.11	21	0.48	14	0.61	14	0.54
Bacha 2000		52	0.36	54	0.00	34	0.07	38	0.22	14	0.53	30	0.34
Badura 1965		19	0.43	20	0.01	14	0.08	11	0.54	1	0.71	6	0.62
Barbosa 1983		8	0.47	41	0.00	23	0.10	17	0.50	20	0.42	22	0.46
Biret 1990		71	0.31	67	0.00	70	0.03	77	0.03	60	0.05	83	0.04
Blet 2003		55	0.35	56	0.00	71	0.04	65	0.04	49	0.06	74	0.05
Block 1995		62	0.33	85	0.00	63	0.04	68	0.04	63	0.04	82	0.04
Blumental 1952		56	0.35	14	0.01	64	0.04	71	0.04	41	0.14	69	0.07
Boshniakovich 1969		22	0.42	39	0.00	19	0.11	14	0.51	23	0.42	23	0.46
Brailowsky 1960		68	0.31	73	0.00	69	0.03	78	0.03	36	0.21	62	0.08
Bunin 1987		36	0.39	19	0.01	26	0.08	30	0.36	7	0.56	25	0.45
Bunin 1987b		34	0.40	27	0.01	20	0.08	28	0.40	7	0.56	17	0.47
Chiu 1999		3	0.50	10	0.03	5	0.14	3	0.63	2	0.69	3	0.66
Cohen 1997		79	0.27	80	0.00	83	0.03	86	0.03	60	0.04	87	0.03
Cortot 1951		81	0.27	49	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	52	0.06	84	0.04
Csalog 1996		51	0.36	82	0.00	56	0.05	56	0.05	32	0.17	58	0.09
Czerny 1949		42	0.38	74	0.00	48	0.05	52	0.05	25	0.53	42	0.16
Czerny 1990		7	0.47	4	0.05	3	0.17	5	0.62	15	0.68	4	0.65
Duchoud 2007		37	0.39	37	0.00	29	0.07	25	0.42	9	0.59	16	0.50
Ezaki 2006		17	0.44	35	0.00	24	0.10	16	0.50	15	0.57	15	0.53
Falvay 1989		28	0.40	78	0.00	32	0.11	35	0.27	59	0.05	50	0.12
Farrell 1958		30	0.40	21	0.01	45	0.05	54	0.05	26	0.32	46	0.13
Ferenczy 1958		86	0.21	72	0.00	87	0.03	80	0.03	61	0.05	81	0.04
Fliere 1977		12	0.46	12	0.01	9	0.11	8	0.55	30	0.36	26	0.44
Fou 1978		4	0.49	7	0.04	4	0.19	4	0.63	7	0.65	5	0.64
Francois 1956		84	0.25	68	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	73	0.03	88	0.03
Friedman 1923		69	0.31	55	0.00	51	0.05	50	0.05	37	0.18	59	0.09
Friedman 1923b		65	0.33	11	0.02	50	0.05	61	0.05	35	0.32	47	0.13
Friedman 1930		64	0.33	52	0.00	62	0.04	67	0.04	38	0.13	66	0.07
Garcia 2007		73	0.30	23	0.01	40	0.06	41	0.17	21	0.39	34	0.26
Garcia 2007b		60	0.33	63	0.00	43	0.07	42	0.14	22	0.45	36	0.25
Gierzod 1998		24	0.42	30	0.00	25	0.09	24	0.43	20	0.43	28	0.43
Gornostaeva 1994		44	0.37	31	0.00	60	0.05	57	0.05	49	0.07	72	0.06
Groot 1988		26	0.41	18	0.01	16	0.10	23	0.47	14	0.47	19	0.47
Harasiewicz 1955		18	0.44	26	0.01	36	0.08	31	0.34	57	0.05	48	0.13
Hatto 1993		33	0.40	48	0.00	33	0.07	33	0.30	41	0.16	39	0.22
Hatto 1997		50	0.36	75	0.00	47	0.05	55	0.05	77	0.04	80	0.04
Horowitz 1949		76	0.29	38	0.00	77	0.06	47	0.06	40	0.20	54	0.11
Indjic 1988		39	0.38	69	0.00	35	0.08	34	0.28	38	0.21	38	0.24
Kapell 1951		25	0.42	16	0.01	15	0.10	13	0.53	17	0.40	20	0.46
Kissin 1993		20	0.43	62	0.00	28	0.10	29	0.39	22	0.54	21	0.46
Kushner 1989		1	0.53	1	0.38	1	0.38	1	0.70	7	0.66	2	0.68
Luisada 1991		27	0.41	24	0.01	38	0.08	39	0.18	24	0.31	37	0.24
Lushtak 2004		40	0.38	17	0.01	61	0.05	63	0.05	39	0.10	68	0.07
Malcuzynski 1961		10	0.47	5	0.05	6	0.15	6	0.59	15	0.52	11	0.55
Magaloff 1978		21	0.43	70	0.00	27	0.09	26	0.42	17	0.44	27	0.43
Magin 1975		45	0.37	61	0.00	54	0.05	58	0.05	40	0.19	57	0.10
Michalowski 1933		77	0.29	66	0.00	58	0.05	51	0.05	12	0.47	43	0.15
Milkina 1970		14	0.45	22	0.01	13	0.08	9	0.55	15	0.59	9	0.57
Mohovich 1999		61	0.33	71	0.00	57	0.06	46	0.06	65	0.04	75	0.05
Moravec 1969		49	0.36	60	0.00	49	0.05	60	0.05	58	0.05	73	0.05
Morozova 2008		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Neighaus 1950		41	0.38	65	0.00	52	0.06	49	0.06	31	0.25	51	0.12
Niedzielski 1931		82	0.25	42	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	81	0.03	85	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		23	0.42	32	0.00	21	0.08	20	0.49	15	0.41	24	0.45
Osinska 1989		43	0.37	29	0.01	30	0.08	27	0.40	33	0.29	31	0.34
Pachmann 1927		70	0.31	51	0.00	76	0.05	62	0.05	43	0.12	63	0.08
Paderewski 1930		85	0.24	90	0.00	85	0.04	72	0.04	74	0.03	86	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		57	0.34	57	0.00	68	0.03	76	0.03	35	0.20	61	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		72	0.30	43	0.00	65	0.04	70	0.04	28	0.32	53	0.11
Poblocka 1999		16	0.45	13	0.01	17	0.11	19	0.49	10	0.60	13	0.54
Rabcewiczowa 1932		59	0.34	77	0.00	59	0.06	48	0.06	51	0.06	71	0.06
Rachmaninoff 1923		53	0.35	58	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.10	32	0.30	41	0.17
Rangell 2001		38	0.38	33	0.00	37	0.08	36	0.26	14	0.54	29	0.37
Richter 1976		2	0.51	3	0.07	2	0.21	2	0.65	7	0.75	1	0.70
Rosen 1989		29	0.40	36	0.00	31	0.10	32	0.32	24	0.30	33	0.31
Rosenthal 1930		67	0.32	50	0.00	75	0.04	64	0.04	34	0.31	56	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		63	0.33	83	0.00	72	0.04	73	0.04	22	0.50	45	0.14
Rosenthal 1931b		80	0.27	47	0.00	79	0.05	59	0.05	34	0.30	52	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		66	0.32	28	0.01	66	0.04	75	0.04	37	0.18	64	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d		83	0.25	53	0.00	78	0.03	79	0.03	38	0.15	70	0.07
Rossi 2007		87	0.17	87	0.00	86	0.03	82	0.03	58	0.05	77	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		9	0.47	25	0.01	10	0.09	7	0.56	8	0.58	8	0.57
Rubinstein 1952		48	0.36	15	0.01	39	0.09	37	0.25	44	0.16	40	0.20
Rubinstein 1966		11	0.46	40	0.00	22	0.08	22	0.48	29	0.23	32	0.33
Schilhawsky 1960		58	0.34	34	0.00	67	0.03	81	0.03	36	0.15	65	0.07
Shebanova 2002		6	0.48	2	0.07	7	0.11	18	0.50	24	0.45	18	0.47
Smith 1975		78	0.28	88	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	76	0.03	89	0.02
Sokolov 2002		54	0.35	76	0.00	55	0.04	74	0.04	30	0.37	49	0.12
Sztompka 1959		5	0.48	9	0.03	8	0.13	12	0.54	13	0.60	10	0.57
Tomsic 1995		31	0.40	6	0.04	11	0.08	15	0.51	4	0.59	12	0.55
Uninsky 1932		15	0.45	46	0.00	12	0.08	10	0.55	10	0.65	7	0.60
Uninsky 1971		32	0.40	64	0.00	41	0.06	40	0.17	44	0.13	44	0.15
Wasowski 1980		46	0.37	45	0.00	53	0.06	45	0.06	40	0.12	60	0.08
Zak 1937		75	0.29	84	0.00	73	0.04	69	0.04	62	0.05	78	0.04
Zak 1951		74	0.29	89	0.00	74	0.04	66	0.04	73	0.04	79	0.04
Random 1		89	-0.04	79	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	60	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		88	0.06	59	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	24	0.27	67	0.07
Random 3		90	-0.04	86	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	24	0.27	76	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).