Tomsic 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		57	0.32	71	0.00	58	0.05	60	0.05	49	0.05	69	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.35	3	0.09	3	0.17	13	0.46	25	0.47	7	0.46
Ashkenazy 1981		27	0.38	42	0.00	41	0.07	40	0.18	55	0.07	47	0.11
Bacha 2000		44	0.34	48	0.00	55	0.05	61	0.05	30	0.25	44	0.11
Badura 1965		50	0.33	37	0.00	47	0.06	56	0.06	17	0.41	34	0.16
Barbosa 1983		49	0.33	35	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.19	48	0.08	43	0.12
Biret 1990		46	0.33	68	0.00	57	0.04	74	0.04	64	0.04	79	0.04
Blet 2003		37	0.36	60	0.00	45	0.08	45	0.08	31	0.32	33	0.16
Block 1995		30	0.38	47	0.00	15	0.11	18	0.41	30	0.31	15	0.36
Blumental 1952		48	0.33	49	0.00	60	0.04	66	0.04	72	0.05	78	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		21	0.39	18	0.01	9	0.11	16	0.43	41	0.17	24	0.27
Brailowsky 1960		74	0.25	40	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	60	0.06	64	0.05
Bunin 1987		47	0.33	65	0.00	36	0.05	39	0.19	30	0.29	27	0.23
Bunin 1987b		45	0.34	19	0.01	31	0.06	31	0.23	27	0.39	21	0.30
Chiu 1999		66	0.29	72	0.00	68	0.04	68	0.04	67	0.04	72	0.04
Cohen 1997		33	0.37	10	0.02	35	0.05	38	0.19	18	0.56	18	0.33
Cortot 1951		85	0.16	66	0.00	83	0.04	81	0.04	71	0.04	81	0.04
Csalog 1996		40	0.35	32	0.00	48	0.06	53	0.06	42	0.11	57	0.08
Czerny 1949		60	0.32	80	0.00	53	0.05	62	0.05	36	0.32	39	0.13
Czerny 1990		38	0.36	20	0.01	56	0.06	55	0.06	78	0.04	70	0.05
Duchoud 2007		55	0.32	12	0.02	32	0.06	33	0.22	15	0.46	19	0.32
Ezaki 2006		2	0.49	1	0.24	1	0.23	1	0.73	7	0.67	1	0.70
Falvay 1989		1	0.49	2	0.21	2	0.35	2	0.70	4	0.62	2	0.66
Farrell 1958		73	0.26	11	0.02	33	0.05	44	0.10	40	0.14	41	0.12
Ferenczy 1958		72	0.26	78	0.00	67	0.05	65	0.05	32	0.42	37	0.14
Fliere 1977		22	0.39	57	0.00	40	0.08	34	0.20	85	0.03	54	0.08
Fou 1978		25	0.38	58	0.00	28	0.07	29	0.25	52	0.05	45	0.11
Francois 1956		68	0.28	79	0.00	63	0.06	54	0.06	36	0.18	51	0.10
Friedman 1923		86	0.15	82	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.03	89	0.02
Friedman 1923b		87	0.15	52	0.00	87	0.03	85	0.03	81	0.03	87	0.03
Friedman 1930		77	0.23	27	0.00	80	0.04	69	0.04	80	0.03	86	0.03
Garcia 2007		43	0.34	23	0.01	29	0.07	25	0.30	16	0.46	14	0.37
Garcia 2007b		29	0.38	33	0.00	30	0.05	30	0.24	24	0.42	20	0.32
Gierzod 1998		34	0.37	21	0.01	8	0.11	15	0.43	33	0.26	17	0.33
Gornostaeva 1994		39	0.35	73	0.00	50	0.08	47	0.08	54	0.05	61	0.06
Groot 1988		11	0.42	7	0.02	14	0.11	10	0.49	28	0.36	12	0.42
Harasiewicz 1955		6	0.43	9	0.02	13	0.12	6	0.57	44	0.12	25	0.26
Hatto 1993		13	0.41	25	0.00	17	0.10	11	0.48	46	0.09	31	0.21
Hatto 1997		8	0.42	14	0.01	11	0.12	8	0.55	22	0.37	8	0.45
Horowitz 1949		71	0.26	41	0.00	78	0.03	82	0.03	62	0.04	84	0.03
Indjic 1988		5	0.44	13	0.02	12	0.13	7	0.55	25	0.40	6	0.47
Kapell 1951		12	0.42	24	0.01	20	0.08	21	0.39	39	0.11	29	0.21
Kissin 1993		17	0.40	50	0.00	21	0.09	22	0.39	28	0.49	9	0.44
Kushner 1989		3	0.46	15	0.01	6	0.13	3	0.62	31	0.29	11	0.42
Luisada 1991		35	0.36	55	0.00	39	0.07	37	0.19	42	0.12	35	0.15
Lushtak 2004		52	0.32	56	0.00	27	0.06	27	0.27	33	0.17	30	0.21
Malcuzynski 1961		4	0.44	28	0.00	7	0.17	5	0.57	23	0.45	5	0.51
Magaloff 1978		59	0.32	53	0.00	69	0.04	71	0.04	83	0.03	82	0.03
Magin 1975		28	0.38	43	0.00	43	0.06	41	0.14	42	0.17	36	0.15
Michalowski 1933		83	0.17	75	0.00	84	0.04	76	0.04	83	0.03	85	0.03
Milkina 1970		31	0.37	17	0.01	18	0.09	14	0.45	29	0.41	10	0.43
Mohovich 1999		9	0.42	6	0.03	4	0.22	9	0.54	17	0.54	4	0.54
Moravec 1969		7	0.43	29	0.00	23	0.12	20	0.39	29	0.32	16	0.35
Morozova 2008		16	0.40	4	0.09	5	0.20	4	0.59	15	0.51	3	0.55
Neighaus 1950		53	0.32	63	0.00	64	0.08	48	0.08	68	0.04	62	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		70	0.28	69	0.00	71	0.06	52	0.06	75	0.04	66	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		36	0.36	34	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.20	51	0.05	49	0.10
Osinska 1989		32	0.37	45	0.00	44	0.07	42	0.14	63	0.05	55	0.08
Pachmann 1927		65	0.30	64	0.00	59	0.05	58	0.05	35	0.19	48	0.10
Paderewski 1930		79	0.22	76	0.00	77	0.03	83	0.03	59	0.05	76	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		56	0.32	88	0.00	62	0.05	57	0.05	63	0.05	63	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		58	0.32	51	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	66	0.04	74	0.04
Poblocka 1999		42	0.35	54	0.00	49	0.07	51	0.07	61	0.05	59	0.06
Rabcewiczowa 1932		62	0.31	46	0.00	54	0.05	64	0.05	55	0.06	67	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923		82	0.19	84	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	82	0.03	83	0.03
Rangell 2001		51	0.33	36	0.00	46	0.08	49	0.08	37	0.26	38	0.14
Richter 1976		19	0.40	8	0.02	26	0.07	32	0.22	48	0.07	42	0.12
Rosen 1989		20	0.40	26	0.00	16	0.12	17	0.42	33	0.18	23	0.27
Rosenthal 1930		81	0.19	81	0.00	82	0.04	79	0.04	71	0.04	77	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		76	0.24	74	0.00	73	0.04	70	0.04	36	0.28	46	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		78	0.22	77	0.00	76	0.04	78	0.04	40	0.17	58	0.08
Rosenthal 1931c		69	0.28	61	0.00	70	0.04	73	0.04	49	0.06	71	0.05
Rosenthal 1931d		80	0.20	83	0.00	79	0.04	80	0.04	64	0.04	80	0.04
Rossi 2007		75	0.24	44	0.00	72	0.04	72	0.04	41	0.18	56	0.08
Rubinstein 1939		63	0.31	59	0.00	51	0.07	50	0.07	57	0.04	65	0.05
Rubinstein 1952		15	0.41	5	0.05	19	0.10	23	0.37	40	0.21	22	0.28
Rubinstein 1966		14	0.41	31	0.00	10	0.11	12	0.47	61	0.06	32	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		84	0.16	62	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	77	0.03	88	0.02
Shebanova 2002		10	0.42	86	0.00	22	0.10	19	0.40	44	0.15	26	0.24
Smith 1975		67	0.29	39	0.00	74	0.05	63	0.05	63	0.04	73	0.04
Sokolov 2002		23	0.39	16	0.01	25	0.08	26	0.30	17	0.48	13	0.38
Sztompka 1959		26	0.38	38	0.00	42	0.06	43	0.13	52	0.06	52	0.09
Tomsic 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1932		54	0.32	87	0.00	52	0.08	46	0.08	51	0.05	60	0.06
Uninsky 1971		24	0.39	30	0.00	24	0.08	24	0.34	43	0.14	28	0.22
Wasowski 1980		18	0.40	22	0.01	34	0.06	28	0.26	52	0.06	40	0.12
Zak 1937		64	0.31	70	0.00	66	0.04	77	0.04	72	0.04	75	0.04
Zak 1951		61	0.31	85	0.00	65	0.05	59	0.05	48	0.06	68	0.05
Random 1		89	0.00	89	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	5	0.49	50	0.10
Random 2		88	0.04	67	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	15	0.38	53	0.09
Random 3		90	-0.08	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	87	0.02	90	0.01

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).