Bunin 1987

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		73	0.26	28	0.00	82	0.04	67	0.04	59	0.04	69	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		77	0.25	29	0.00	70	0.03	77	0.03	78	0.03	82	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		10	0.42	30	0.00	20	0.08	18	0.49	30	0.33	11	0.40
Bacha 2000		79	0.24	50	0.00	73	0.03	83	0.03	67	0.04	77	0.03
Badura 1965		67	0.27	12	0.00	38	0.06	45	0.10	54	0.04	51	0.06
Barbosa 1983		11	0.41	51	0.00	10	0.09	13	0.53	32	0.29	13	0.39
Biret 1990		41	0.33	52	0.00	34	0.06	34	0.23	44	0.14	29	0.18
Blet 2003		21	0.37	31	0.00	11	0.11	15	0.52	17	0.49	9	0.50
Block 1995		66	0.28	7	0.00	57	0.05	55	0.05	71	0.04	71	0.04
Blumental 1952		48	0.31	53	0.00	41	0.05	43	0.13	54	0.06	47	0.09
Boshniakovich 1969		26	0.36	8	0.00	29	0.10	26	0.36	60	0.05	36	0.13
Brailowsky 1960		74	0.26	13	0.00	77	0.03	88	0.03	78	0.04	78	0.03
Bunin 1987		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Bunin 1987b		1	0.98	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Chiu 1999		29	0.35	15	0.00	35	0.07	30	0.30	40	0.14	28	0.20
Cohen 1997		82	0.23	5	0.00	83	0.04	66	0.04	73	0.03	84	0.03
Cortot 1951		87	0.16	54	0.00	87	0.03	87	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.03
Csalog 1996		35	0.34	55	0.00	45	0.07	44	0.13	32	0.19	30	0.16
Czerny 1949		58	0.29	56	0.00	78	0.03	78	0.03	66	0.05	67	0.04
Czerny 1990		18	0.39	57	0.00	21	0.08	19	0.48	40	0.18	22	0.29
Duchoud 2007		52	0.30	32	0.00	22	0.10	27	0.35	18	0.43	14	0.39
Ezaki 2006		39	0.33	58	0.00	32	0.07	36	0.20	66	0.05	43	0.10
Falvay 1989		17	0.39	33	0.00	14	0.10	24	0.40	59	0.05	31	0.14
Farrell 1958		37	0.33	20	0.00	33	0.06	37	0.20	45	0.10	33	0.14
Ferenczy 1958		83	0.22	16	0.00	85	0.04	69	0.04	72	0.04	66	0.04
Fliere 1977		7	0.44	59	0.00	3	0.17	11	0.53	40	0.24	15	0.36
Fou 1978		72	0.26	21	0.00	76	0.03	82	0.03	74	0.03	80	0.03
Francois 1956		76	0.25	60	0.00	66	0.03	84	0.03	47	0.05	76	0.04
Friedman 1923		56	0.30	61	0.00	47	0.06	52	0.06	32	0.30	37	0.13
Friedman 1923b		53	0.30	62	0.00	46	0.05	59	0.05	37	0.29	42	0.12
Friedman 1930		34	0.34	34	0.00	19	0.11	14	0.52	23	0.50	7	0.51
Garcia 2007		49	0.31	63	0.00	49	0.06	53	0.06	38	0.16	45	0.10
Garcia 2007b		13	0.40	64	0.00	12	0.11	7	0.60	12	0.65	2	0.62
Gierzod 1998		71	0.26	65	0.00	74	0.03	85	0.03	78	0.04	83	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		36	0.33	2	0.00	50	0.06	50	0.06	59	0.05	57	0.05
Groot 1988		12	0.41	6	0.00	6	0.15	21	0.42	33	0.27	17	0.34
Harasiewicz 1955		60	0.29	66	0.00	71	0.03	76	0.03	86	0.02	90	0.02
Hatto 1993		22	0.37	22	0.00	18	0.16	12	0.53	41	0.17	21	0.30
Hatto 1997		28	0.36	35	0.00	17	0.09	17	0.50	36	0.22	18	0.33
Horowitz 1949		4	0.45	9	0.00	13	0.12	16	0.51	6	0.67	4	0.58
Indjic 1988		20	0.38	23	0.00	8	0.11	9	0.55	35	0.28	12	0.39
Kapell 1951		9	0.43	67	0.00	16	0.10	10	0.55	38	0.18	19	0.31
Kissin 1993		75	0.26	36	0.00	75	0.03	73	0.03	57	0.06	63	0.04
Kushner 1989		15	0.40	24	0.00	26	0.10	20	0.47	44	0.10	26	0.22
Luisada 1991		5	0.44	10	0.00	9	0.11	6	0.60	19	0.47	6	0.53
Lushtak 2004		31	0.35	17	0.00	28	0.10	22	0.42	33	0.21	20	0.30
Malcuzynski 1961		3	0.46	68	0.00	4	0.13	3	0.69	23	0.47	5	0.57
Magaloff 1978		38	0.33	69	0.00	43	0.06	41	0.14	52	0.05	49	0.08
Magin 1975		32	0.35	70	0.00	37	0.06	38	0.19	44	0.11	32	0.14
Michalowski 1933		81	0.23	71	0.00	72	0.03	72	0.03	64	0.05	62	0.04
Milkina 1970		57	0.29	37	0.00	64	0.05	57	0.05	65	0.04	60	0.04
Mohovich 1999		65	0.28	72	0.00	65	0.05	60	0.05	65	0.04	72	0.04
Moravec 1969		19	0.38	73	0.00	31	0.09	32	0.29	63	0.05	38	0.12
Morozova 2008		16	0.39	74	0.00	15	0.10	8	0.56	31	0.36	10	0.45
Neighaus 1950		62	0.28	38	0.00	59	0.04	64	0.04	72	0.04	74	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		55	0.30	39	0.00	53	0.08	46	0.08	41	0.18	40	0.12
Ohlsson 1999		43	0.33	40	0.00	48	0.06	54	0.06	78	0.03	61	0.04
Osinska 1989		46	0.32	41	0.00	44	0.06	42	0.14	65	0.05	48	0.08
Pachmann 1927		47	0.31	75	0.00	51	0.06	51	0.06	34	0.24	41	0.12
Paderewski 1930		80	0.24	76	0.00	68	0.03	79	0.03	48	0.07	55	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		45	0.32	77	0.00	60	0.04	63	0.04	56	0.06	52	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		70	0.26	78	0.00	69	0.04	70	0.04	48	0.05	59	0.04
Poblocka 1999		25	0.36	25	0.00	36	0.07	33	0.24	54	0.06	39	0.12
Rabcewiczowa 1932		50	0.31	79	0.00	55	0.07	47	0.07	48	0.07	50	0.07
Rachmaninoff 1923		6	0.44	42	0.00	5	0.16	5	0.61	10	0.57	3	0.59
Rangell 2001		51	0.31	80	0.00	58	0.05	61	0.05	52	0.06	58	0.05
Richter 1976		40	0.33	43	0.00	39	0.05	35	0.22	47	0.08	35	0.13
Rosen 1989		54	0.30	26	0.00	40	0.05	39	0.16	54	0.05	46	0.09
Rosenthal 1930		68	0.27	44	0.00	81	0.04	68	0.04	54	0.05	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		86	0.18	45	0.00	86	0.03	75	0.03	62	0.04	81	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		84	0.21	81	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	65	0.04	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		69	0.27	82	0.00	67	0.04	71	0.04	54	0.05	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		78	0.24	83	0.00	80	0.03	74	0.03	47	0.06	73	0.04
Rossi 2007		85	0.19	84	0.00	79	0.03	86	0.03	66	0.04	79	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		44	0.33	14	0.00	54	0.07	48	0.07	62	0.04	54	0.05
Rubinstein 1952		63	0.28	4	0.00	61	0.04	65	0.04	74	0.03	87	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		64	0.28	85	0.00	62	0.05	62	0.05	81	0.03	65	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		30	0.35	46	0.00	30	0.11	28	0.33	21	0.37	16	0.35
Shebanova 2002		8	0.43	3	0.00	7	0.14	4	0.65	28	0.40	8	0.51
Smith 1975		88	0.14	86	0.00	88	0.03	81	0.03	86	0.02	88	0.02
Sokolov 2002		61	0.29	87	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	56	0.05	53	0.05
Sztompka 1959		27	0.36	88	0.00	52	0.06	49	0.06	61	0.05	56	0.05
Tomsic 1995		42	0.33	27	0.00	23	0.10	31	0.29	40	0.19	25	0.23
Uninsky 1932		33	0.35	89	0.00	42	0.05	40	0.16	48	0.06	44	0.10
Uninsky 1971		59	0.29	47	0.00	63	0.05	56	0.05	79	0.03	64	0.04
Wasowski 1980		14	0.40	18	0.00	27	0.11	23	0.41	77	0.04	34	0.13
Zak 1937		24	0.37	48	0.00	25	0.10	29	0.33	39	0.17	24	0.24
Zak 1951		23	0.37	11	0.00	24	0.10	25	0.37	33	0.20	23	0.27
Average		2	0.56	19	0.00	2	0.67	2	0.87	61	0.05	27	0.21
Random 1		90	-0.03	90	0.00	90	0.02	90	0.02	79	0.02	89	0.02
Random 2		89	0.03	91	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	46	0.07	68	0.04
Random 3		91	-0.08	49	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	77	0.02	91	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).