Friedman 1923b

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		50	0.29	69	0.00	54	0.04	72	0.04	41	0.14	46	0.07
Anderszewski 2003		74	0.22	18	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	76	0.03	82	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		9	0.43	30	0.00	7	0.21	7	0.70	18	0.56	5	0.63
Bacha 2000		82	0.18	70	0.00	80	0.03	86	0.03	80	0.03	76	0.03
Badura 1965		23	0.39	71	0.00	18	0.11	23	0.52	8	0.57	10	0.54
Barbosa 1983		49	0.29	37	0.00	60	0.05	60	0.05	70	0.05	54	0.05
Biret 1990		69	0.24	72	0.00	65	0.05	65	0.05	72	0.04	72	0.04
Blet 2003		22	0.39	14	0.00	26	0.13	24	0.48	20	0.47	17	0.47
Block 1995		18	0.40	38	0.00	20	0.12	18	0.55	29	0.35	19	0.44
Blumental 1952		59	0.28	31	0.00	58	0.05	61	0.05	74	0.05	57	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		21	0.39	27	0.00	16	0.13	16	0.56	43	0.16	28	0.30
Brailowsky 1960		44	0.31	39	0.00	47	0.08	46	0.08	39	0.17	40	0.12
Bunin 1987		48	0.30	73	0.00	34	0.07	37	0.29	59	0.05	42	0.12
Bunin 1987b		58	0.28	74	0.00	46	0.07	48	0.07	50	0.06	49	0.06
Chiu 1999		24	0.38	49	0.00	29	0.09	27	0.42	35	0.17	29	0.27
Cohen 1997		81	0.18	75	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.02	88	0.02
Cortot 1951		84	0.16	76	0.00	83	0.03	81	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.03
Csalog 1996		41	0.33	28	0.00	50	0.06	51	0.06	52	0.06	50	0.06
Czerny 1949		87	0.11	77	0.00	87	0.03	80	0.03	82	0.03	83	0.03
Czerny 1990		27	0.37	19	0.00	21	0.14	21	0.53	37	0.27	22	0.38
Duchoud 2007		52	0.29	5	0.00	42	0.08	42	0.16	39	0.13	34	0.14
Ezaki 2006		76	0.20	50	0.00	79	0.03	85	0.03	85	0.03	75	0.03
Falvay 1989		72	0.23	20	0.00	72	0.05	62	0.05	83	0.03	62	0.04
Farrell 1958		60	0.28	45	0.00	49	0.06	54	0.06	54	0.06	48	0.06
Ferenczy 1958		88	0.09	51	0.00	88	0.04	79	0.04	77	0.04	69	0.04
Fliere 1977		4	0.49	32	0.00	6	0.23	4	0.73	29	0.38	11	0.53
Fou 1978		28	0.36	25	0.00	25	0.13	26	0.46	58	0.05	33	0.15
Francois 1956		75	0.22	52	0.00	55	0.04	73	0.04	49	0.05	73	0.04
Friedman 1923		1	0.97	1	0.99	1	0.98	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Friedman 1923b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1930		2	0.68	3	0.00	2	0.83	2	0.95	2	0.94	2	0.94
Garcia 2007		57	0.28	29	0.00	62	0.06	50	0.06	52	0.05	56	0.05
Garcia 2007b		53	0.29	78	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	77	0.04	74	0.04
Gierzod 1998		71	0.23	46	0.00	77	0.04	69	0.04	80	0.03	84	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		68	0.25	53	0.00	44	0.06	45	0.11	66	0.04	47	0.07
Groot 1988		36	0.34	7	0.00	36	0.07	33	0.35	52	0.05	39	0.13
Harasiewicz 1955		20	0.40	4	0.00	31	0.08	30	0.39	57	0.05	36	0.14
Hatto 1993		32	0.35	33	0.00	33	0.08	29	0.40	60	0.05	35	0.14
Hatto 1997		66	0.26	79	0.00	66	0.06	53	0.06	83	0.03	68	0.04
Horowitz 1949		25	0.38	21	0.00	24	0.14	19	0.54	9	0.63	8	0.58
Indjic 1988		34	0.34	80	0.00	35	0.07	32	0.37	52	0.07	32	0.16
Kapell 1951		54	0.29	81	0.00	61	0.06	52	0.06	68	0.05	53	0.05
Kissin 1993		29	0.36	10	0.00	32	0.09	31	0.37	41	0.27	26	0.32
Kushner 1989		31	0.35	8	0.00	38	0.10	34	0.34	68	0.05	37	0.13
Luisada 1991		19	0.40	54	0.00	23	0.13	20	0.54	34	0.24	23	0.36
Lushtak 2004		45	0.31	82	0.00	45	0.07	44	0.13	50	0.05	45	0.08
Malcuzynski 1961		39	0.33	55	0.00	51	0.05	63	0.05	72	0.04	64	0.04
Magaloff 1978		13	0.42	56	0.00	11	0.09	15	0.58	24	0.38	16	0.47
Magin 1975		37	0.33	57	0.00	41	0.07	41	0.18	55	0.05	44	0.09
Michalowski 1933		40	0.33	58	0.00	27	0.09	39	0.23	25	0.38	27	0.30
Milkina 1970		79	0.19	83	0.00	74	0.05	66	0.05	86	0.02	80	0.03
Mohovich 1999		64	0.27	59	0.00	68	0.05	67	0.05	67	0.04	71	0.04
Moravec 1969		65	0.26	22	0.00	70	0.04	74	0.04	76	0.03	77	0.03
Morozova 2008		42	0.33	6	0.00	28	0.09	36	0.32	62	0.05	38	0.13
Neighaus 1950		5	0.46	34	0.00	4	0.30	8	0.68	2	0.64	4	0.66
Niedzielski 1931		26	0.37	15	0.00	12	0.10	25	0.47	15	0.46	18	0.46
Ohlsson 1999		11	0.42	84	0.00	14	0.13	14	0.59	17	0.41	15	0.49
Osinska 1989		38	0.33	23	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.16	57	0.05	43	0.09
Pachmann 1927		12	0.42	2	0.00	13	0.11	22	0.52	8	0.61	9	0.56
Paderewski 1930		43	0.32	11	0.00	39	0.09	40	0.23	25	0.44	25	0.32
Perlemuter 1992		33	0.35	12	0.00	37	0.08	35	0.33	26	0.37	24	0.35
Pierdomenico 2008		56	0.28	47	0.00	64	0.06	55	0.06	55	0.04	52	0.05
Poblocka 1999		35	0.34	26	0.00	40	0.08	38	0.23	52	0.06	41	0.12
Rabcewiczowa 1932		86	0.14	60	0.00	85	0.03	83	0.03	84	0.03	79	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		16	0.40	40	0.00	10	0.10	11	0.64	12	0.55	7	0.59
Rangell 2001		47	0.30	85	0.00	48	0.07	47	0.07	48	0.06	51	0.06
Richter 1976		15	0.41	35	0.00	22	0.10	17	0.56	33	0.30	21	0.41
Rosen 1989		10	0.42	61	0.00	17	0.16	9	0.66	24	0.30	20	0.44
Rosenthal 1930		61	0.28	9	0.00	69	0.04	76	0.04	64	0.04	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		83	0.17	86	0.00	84	0.04	77	0.04	75	0.04	66	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		77	0.19	41	0.00	78	0.02	89	0.02	70	0.03	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		70	0.24	87	0.00	63	0.06	49	0.06	60	0.05	59	0.05
Rosenthal 1931d		78	0.19	62	0.00	76	0.04	78	0.04	49	0.06	58	0.05
Rossi 2007		80	0.18	24	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	62	0.05	61	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		73	0.23	63	0.00	73	0.05	57	0.05	89	0.02	78	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		51	0.29	64	0.00	56	0.04	68	0.04	79	0.03	86	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		46	0.31	65	0.00	59	0.05	59	0.05	80	0.03	67	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		55	0.29	48	0.00	52	0.05	64	0.05	61	0.05	55	0.05
Shebanova 2002		7	0.44	66	0.00	5	0.22	12	0.62	24	0.46	13	0.53
Smith 1975		63	0.27	42	0.00	71	0.04	71	0.04	71	0.04	63	0.04
Sokolov 2002		67	0.26	16	0.00	67	0.04	70	0.04	70	0.04	60	0.04
Sztompka 1959		17	0.40	43	0.00	19	0.11	10	0.64	24	0.42	14	0.52
Tomsic 1995		85	0.15	67	0.00	86	0.03	82	0.03	86	0.03	81	0.03
Uninsky 1932		30	0.36	68	0.00	30	0.08	28	0.41	42	0.14	30	0.24
Uninsky 1971		62	0.27	88	0.00	57	0.05	58	0.05	70	0.04	65	0.04
Wasowski 1980		8	0.44	17	0.00	9	0.24	5	0.72	24	0.48	6	0.59
Zak 1937		6	0.44	44	0.00	8	0.24	6	0.72	7	0.64	3	0.68
Zak 1951		14	0.41	89	0.00	15	0.16	13	0.62	16	0.45	12	0.53
Average		3	0.57	36	0.00	3	0.59	3	0.90	57	0.06	31	0.23
Random 1		89	-0.06	90	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	67	0.02	87	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.08	91	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	91	0.01	90	0.01
Random 3		91	-0.11	13	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	90	0.01	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).