Uninsky 1932

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		67	0.31	71	0.00	76	0.04	64	0.04	68	0.04	75	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		79	0.26	57	0.00	72	0.06	48	0.06	55	0.06	63	0.06
Ashkenazy 1981		6	0.49	14	0.01	13	0.16	9	0.67	10	0.64	7	0.65
Bacha 2000		68	0.31	78	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.09	25	0.28	36	0.16
Badura 1965		59	0.32	22	0.00	33	0.08	38	0.14	31	0.20	35	0.17
Barbosa 1983		20	0.40	10	0.02	20	0.10	17	0.51	35	0.23	20	0.34
Biret 1990		45	0.34	64	0.00	31	0.09	32	0.24	31	0.37	23	0.30
Blet 2003		42	0.35	73	0.00	65	0.03	82	0.03	44	0.10	66	0.05
Block 1995		28	0.38	16	0.01	37	0.06	33	0.22	39	0.17	32	0.19
Blumental 1952		40	0.35	15	0.01	41	0.06	42	0.14	64	0.05	57	0.08
Boshniakovich 1969		33	0.36	35	0.00	23	0.09	22	0.40	55	0.06	38	0.15
Brailowsky 1960		74	0.29	56	0.00	77	0.05	52	0.05	50	0.07	60	0.06
Bunin 1987		41	0.35	40	0.00	45	0.06	47	0.06	39	0.16	48	0.10
Bunin 1987b		49	0.34	58	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.08	41	0.18	44	0.12
Chiu 1999		34	0.36	66	0.00	51	0.04	62	0.04	64	0.04	70	0.04
Cohen 1997		80	0.25	90	0.00	83	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04	79	0.04
Cortot 1951		71	0.30	61	0.00	75	0.03	72	0.03	31	0.25	54	0.09
Csalog 1996		54	0.33	34	0.00	46	0.04	60	0.04	25	0.26	47	0.10
Czerny 1949		57	0.33	41	0.00	63	0.03	80	0.03	38	0.25	52	0.09
Czerny 1990		9	0.47	11	0.02	9	0.20	5	0.70	18	0.66	5	0.68
Duchoud 2007		78	0.27	29	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	53	0.06	76	0.04
Ezaki 2006		53	0.33	75	0.00	60	0.06	45	0.06	77	0.04	64	0.05
Falvay 1989		29	0.37	83	0.00	48	0.04	67	0.04	53	0.05	71	0.04
Farrell 1958		72	0.29	81	0.00	69	0.05	54	0.05	52	0.06	65	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		84	0.20	42	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	60	0.05	82	0.03
Fliere 1977		2	0.50	7	0.04	6	0.18	2	0.72	15	0.54	8	0.62
Fou 1978		11	0.46	38	0.00	12	0.15	11	0.61	16	0.52	12	0.56
Francois 1956		82	0.22	88	0.00	81	0.03	79	0.03	80	0.03	89	0.03
Friedman 1923		47	0.34	76	0.00	52	0.05	58	0.05	33	0.28	45	0.12
Friedman 1923b		37	0.36	53	0.00	40	0.07	41	0.14	27	0.41	30	0.24
Friedman 1930		63	0.31	51	0.00	54	0.05	56	0.05	37	0.15	50	0.09
Garcia 2007		66	0.31	74	0.00	70	0.05	59	0.05	48	0.06	67	0.05
Garcia 2007b		58	0.32	60	0.00	59	0.06	49	0.06	53	0.05	69	0.05
Gierzod 1998		62	0.32	12	0.02	22	0.09	25	0.34	37	0.19	28	0.25
Gornostaeva 1994		76	0.28	77	0.00	68	0.03	73	0.03	71	0.03	85	0.03
Groot 1988		22	0.39	50	0.00	38	0.05	35	0.18	52	0.05	53	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		7	0.48	4	0.10	5	0.21	8	0.68	13	0.54	9	0.61
Hatto 1993		25	0.38	48	0.00	19	0.10	19	0.46	37	0.17	25	0.28
Hatto 1997		51	0.33	31	0.00	36	0.07	36	0.17	53	0.05	51	0.09
Horowitz 1949		27	0.38	70	0.00	49	0.04	65	0.04	24	0.49	39	0.14
Indjic 1988		24	0.39	68	0.00	21	0.09	20	0.43	35	0.24	21	0.32
Kapell 1951		12	0.46	21	0.00	17	0.20	14	0.54	27	0.30	16	0.40
Kissin 1993		5	0.49	1	0.17	1	0.17	4	0.70	8	0.76	1	0.73
Kushner 1989		21	0.40	20	0.00	25	0.09	21	0.42	52	0.06	37	0.16
Luisada 1991		17	0.43	9	0.02	26	0.08	27	0.29	34	0.22	27	0.25
Lushtak 2004		69	0.30	28	0.00	47	0.04	61	0.04	51	0.05	78	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		8	0.48	5	0.09	4	0.15	3	0.72	5	0.65	4	0.68
Magaloff 1978		16	0.43	26	0.00	11	0.17	12	0.58	9	0.56	11	0.57
Magin 1975		23	0.39	36	0.00	27	0.08	24	0.39	28	0.37	17	0.38
Michalowski 1933		50	0.34	44	0.00	57	0.04	68	0.04	10	0.48	40	0.14
Milkina 1970		36	0.36	54	0.00	35	0.07	29	0.26	39	0.23	29	0.24
Mohovich 1999		70	0.30	89	0.00	78	0.06	46	0.06	71	0.04	68	0.05
Moravec 1969		18	0.42	8	0.03	15	0.15	18	0.50	13	0.47	15	0.48
Morozova 2008		14	0.45	24	0.00	10	0.16	10	0.65	10	0.55	10	0.60
Neighaus 1950		61	0.32	65	0.00	73	0.04	70	0.04	75	0.03	87	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		35	0.36	55	0.00	50	0.05	53	0.05	23	0.34	41	0.13
Ohlsson 1999		46	0.34	32	0.00	28	0.08	31	0.25	43	0.13	33	0.18
Osinska 1989		56	0.33	52	0.00	34	0.06	37	0.15	74	0.04	56	0.08
Pachmann 1927		43	0.35	82	0.00	32	0.07	34	0.19	19	0.47	22	0.30
Paderewski 1930		73	0.29	49	0.00	71	0.05	50	0.05	30	0.36	42	0.13
Perlemuter 1992		55	0.33	39	0.00	66	0.03	81	0.03	36	0.20	55	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		31	0.37	23	0.00	42	0.06	40	0.14	27	0.34	31	0.22
Poblocka 1999		19	0.41	17	0.01	18	0.09	26	0.32	40	0.21	26	0.26
Rabcewiczowa 1932		65	0.31	47	0.00	61	0.03	77	0.03	53	0.06	73	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		10	0.47	3	0.13	8	0.20	15	0.53	8	0.58	13	0.55
Rangell 2001		32	0.37	30	0.00	56	0.04	69	0.04	39	0.23	49	0.10
Richter 1976		1	0.51	6	0.08	3	0.19	7	0.68	13	0.64	6	0.66
Rosen 1989		52	0.33	72	0.00	67	0.04	71	0.04	73	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		75	0.29	59	0.00	80	0.03	75	0.03	55	0.05	77	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		85	0.19	79	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	54	0.05	81	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		86	0.19	84	0.00	85	0.03	85	0.03	48	0.06	80	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		81	0.25	67	0.00	82	0.03	74	0.03	67	0.04	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		87	0.17	85	0.00	87	0.03	76	0.03	73	0.04	86	0.03
Rossi 2007		83	0.21	46	0.00	62	0.03	83	0.03	15	0.46	43	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		39	0.35	25	0.00	29	0.08	30	0.26	25	0.30	24	0.28
Rubinstein 1952		38	0.36	45	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.14	47	0.08	46	0.11
Rubinstein 1966		26	0.38	37	0.00	24	0.09	23	0.40	58	0.07	34	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		64	0.31	80	0.00	55	0.04	63	0.04	39	0.13	58	0.07
Shebanova 2002		13	0.45	18	0.00	16	0.15	16	0.53	38	0.27	18	0.38
Smith 1975		77	0.28	19	0.00	79	0.05	55	0.05	66	0.04	72	0.04
Sokolov 2002		44	0.34	33	0.00	30	0.09	28	0.27	20	0.44	19	0.34
Sztompka 1959		4	0.49	13	0.02	7	0.18	6	0.69	6	0.70	3	0.69
Tomsic 1995		60	0.32	86	0.00	58	0.05	51	0.05	46	0.08	62	0.06
Uninsky 1932		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1971		3	0.50	2	0.15	2	0.16	1	0.74	1	0.70	2	0.72
Wasowski 1980		15	0.45	27	0.00	14	0.17	13	0.56	18	0.51	14	0.53
Zak 1937		30	0.37	43	0.00	53	0.05	57	0.05	46	0.07	61	0.06
Zak 1951		48	0.34	87	0.00	64	0.03	84	0.03	55	0.05	74	0.04
Random 1		89	-0.03	63	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	42	0.09	84	0.03
Random 2		88	0.03	69	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	26	0.25	59	0.07
Random 3		90	-0.04	62	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	51	0.05	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).