Random 3

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		69	-0.07	43	0.00	62	0.04	55	0.04	91	0.01	63	0.02
Anderszewski 2003		43	-0.04	53	0.00	35	0.05	26	0.26	91	0.01	31	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		61	-0.06	30	0.00	77	0.02	82	0.02	91	0.01	86	0.01
Bacha 2000		71	-0.08	38	0.00	67	0.03	60	0.03	90	0.01	46	0.02
Badura 1965		77	-0.08	21	0.00	55	0.03	71	0.03	90	0.01	66	0.02
Barbosa 1983		57	-0.06	77	0.00	37	0.06	33	0.20	91	0.01	40	0.04
Biret 1990		36	-0.03	39	0.00	48	0.05	49	0.05	91	0.01	73	0.02
Blet 2003		15	0.00	24	0.00	44	0.05	43	0.11	90	0.01	45	0.03
Block 1995		54	-0.06	71	0.00	63	0.04	52	0.04	91	0.01	67	0.02
Blumental 1952		82	-0.09	64	0.00	68	0.03	61	0.03	91	0.01	69	0.02
Boshniakovich 1969		31	-0.03	17	0.01	30	0.08	25	0.27	89	0.02	17	0.07
Brailowsky 1960		70	-0.07	37	0.00	32	0.04	37	0.18	89	0.02	22	0.06
Bunin 1987		73	-0.08	87	0.00	73	0.02	77	0.02	91	0.01	87	0.01
Bunin 1987b		67	-0.07	65	0.00	66	0.03	66	0.03	91	0.01	55	0.02
Chiu 1999		30	-0.02	52	0.00	39	0.05	42	0.13	91	0.01	37	0.04
Cohen 1997		20	-0.01	18	0.01	20	0.07	20	0.32	91	0.01	29	0.06
Cortot 1951		1	0.05	1	0.18	1	0.18	1	0.71	69	0.04	3	0.17
Csalog 1996		56	-0.06	29	0.00	65	0.03	63	0.03	90	0.01	58	0.02
Czerny 1949		3	0.04	4	0.12	2	0.22	2	0.68	87	0.02	4	0.12
Czerny 1990		35	-0.03	79	0.00	50	0.05	46	0.05	90	0.01	71	0.02
Duchoud 2007		14	0.00	14	0.01	52	0.05	48	0.05	90	0.01	64	0.02
Ezaki 2006		40	-0.04	25	0.00	21	0.08	15	0.37	91	0.01	19	0.06
Falvay 1989		89	-0.12	42	0.00	87	0.02	81	0.02	91	0.01	78	0.01
Farrell 1958		63	-0.07	26	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.10	91	0.01	43	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		86	-0.11	70	0.00	61	0.04	54	0.04	90	0.01	61	0.02
Fliere 1977		11	0.00	41	0.00	23	0.07	31	0.21	90	0.02	20	0.06
Fou 1978		21	-0.01	60	0.00	22	0.07	34	0.20	89	0.02	25	0.06
Francois 1956		17	-0.01	19	0.01	12	0.07	12	0.42	90	0.02	11	0.09
Friedman 1923		90	-0.12	84	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01
Friedman 1923b		87	-0.11	68	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	91	0.01	88	0.01
Friedman 1930		51	-0.05	59	0.00	78	0.02	79	0.02	91	0.01	84	0.01
Garcia 2007		48	-0.05	44	0.00	58	0.03	64	0.03	91	0.01	65	0.02
Garcia 2007b		37	-0.03	34	0.00	54	0.03	56	0.03	90	0.01	76	0.02
Gierzod 1998		13	0.00	81	0.00	17	0.11	11	0.42	90	0.02	10	0.09
Gornostaeva 1994		49	-0.05	45	0.00	31	0.05	28	0.23	91	0.01	34	0.05
Groot 1988		44	-0.04	62	0.00	82	0.03	67	0.03	91	0.01	74	0.02
Harasiewicz 1955		58	-0.06	61	0.00	34	0.05	32	0.21	90	0.01	36	0.05
Hatto 1993		75	-0.08	76	0.00	80	0.02	86	0.02	91	0.01	90	0.01
Hatto 1997		76	-0.08	90	0.00	75	0.03	73	0.03	91	0.01	60	0.02
Horowitz 1949		85	-0.10	82	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	91	0.01	80	0.01
Indjic 1988		66	-0.07	74	0.00	81	0.03	58	0.03	91	0.01	57	0.02
Kapell 1951		33	-0.03	15	0.01	27	0.07	21	0.31	90	0.01	26	0.06
Kissin 1993		47	-0.05	83	0.00	43	0.05	44	0.11	91	0.01	44	0.03
Kushner 1989		32	-0.03	23	0.00	51	0.04	53	0.04	90	0.01	53	0.02
Luisada 1991		79	-0.09	56	0.00	69	0.03	69	0.03	91	0.01	47	0.02
Lushtak 2004		59	-0.06	10	0.01	41	0.05	39	0.15	90	0.01	41	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		10	0.00	50	0.00	9	0.14	6	0.50	89	0.01	15	0.07
Magaloff 1978		19	-0.01	66	0.00	16	0.08	16	0.36	89	0.01	24	0.06
Magin 1975		34	-0.03	28	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.14	90	0.01	38	0.04
Michalowski 1933		62	-0.06	69	0.00	79	0.02	84	0.02	91	0.01	81	0.01
Milkina 1970		81	-0.09	33	0.00	74	0.03	75	0.03	91	0.01	54	0.02
Mohovich 1999		50	-0.05	32	0.00	59	0.03	62	0.03	90	0.01	70	0.02
Moravec 1969		88	-0.12	48	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	91	0.01	77	0.01
Morozova 2008		41	-0.04	54	0.00	28	0.06	24	0.27	90	0.01	33	0.05
Neighaus 1950		52	-0.05	58	0.00	40	0.05	40	0.14	90	0.02	35	0.05
Niedzielski 1931		55	-0.06	72	0.00	72	0.03	70	0.03	91	0.01	51	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		23	-0.01	31	0.00	18	0.09	22	0.30	89	0.02	13	0.08
Osinska 1989		45	-0.04	75	0.00	24	0.06	18	0.33	90	0.01	21	0.06
Pachmann 1927		42	-0.04	12	0.01	26	0.07	27	0.24	89	0.02	16	0.07
Paderewski 1930		22	-0.01	51	0.00	29	0.08	23	0.30	90	0.01	30	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		4	0.01	2	0.17	3	0.25	3	0.54	89	0.02	6	0.10
Pierdomenico 2008		9	0.00	22	0.00	11	0.07	13	0.42	89	0.02	8	0.09
Poblocka 1999		84	-0.10	63	0.00	64	0.03	65	0.03	91	0.01	48	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		28	-0.02	35	0.00	47	0.05	47	0.05	91	0.01	52	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		24	-0.01	36	0.00	46	0.05	50	0.05	91	0.01	49	0.02
Rangell 2001		60	-0.06	40	0.00	57	0.03	72	0.03	90	0.01	72	0.02
Richter 1976		12	0.00	7	0.03	7	0.17	10	0.43	89	0.02	9	0.09
Rosen 1989		64	-0.07	49	0.00	53	0.03	57	0.03	91	0.01	68	0.02
Rosenthal 1930		18	-0.01	6	0.04	13	0.07	19	0.32	91	0.01	28	0.06
Rosenthal 1931		91	-0.13	78	0.00	86	0.02	83	0.02	91	0.01	82	0.01
Rosenthal 1931b		74	-0.08	73	0.00	70	0.03	76	0.03	91	0.01	75	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		29	-0.02	13	0.01	14	0.10	36	0.18	91	0.01	42	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		83	-0.09	85	0.00	83	0.02	80	0.02	91	0.01	89	0.01
Rossi 2007		7	0.00	5	0.07	5	0.12	7	0.49	85	0.02	7	0.10
Rubinstein 1939		68	-0.07	46	0.00	56	0.03	68	0.03	91	0.01	50	0.02
Rubinstein 1952		27	-0.02	47	0.00	36	0.06	29	0.23	90	0.02	18	0.07
Rubinstein 1966		80	-0.09	88	0.00	71	0.03	74	0.03	90	0.01	59	0.02
Schilhawsky 1960		46	-0.05	27	0.00	15	0.08	30	0.22	91	0.01	32	0.05
Shebanova 2002		53	-0.05	67	0.00	76	0.02	78	0.02	91	0.01	85	0.01
Smith 1975		5	0.01	9	0.02	6	0.15	4	0.53	90	0.01	14	0.07
Sokolov 2002		16	-0.01	11	0.01	10	0.14	14	0.38	91	0.01	23	0.06
Sztompka 1959		25	-0.01	86	0.00	38	0.05	38	0.16	91	0.01	39	0.04
Tomsic 1995		78	-0.08	89	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	91	0.01	79	0.01
Uninsky 1932		39	-0.04	57	0.00	49	0.05	51	0.05	90	0.01	62	0.02
Uninsky 1971		65	-0.07	80	0.00	60	0.03	59	0.03	91	0.01	56	0.02
Wasowski 1980		8	0.00	20	0.00	19	0.10	9	0.47	89	0.02	5	0.10
Zak 1937		38	-0.03	55	0.00	33	0.05	35	0.20	89	0.02	27	0.06
Zak 1951		26	-0.02	16	0.01	25	0.07	17	0.35	89	0.02	12	0.08
Average		72	-0.08	91	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	91	0.01	83	0.01
Random 1		6	0.01	8	0.02	8	0.14	8	0.48	20	0.38	2	0.43
Random 2		2	0.04	3	0.16	4	0.21	5	0.53	15	0.40	1	0.46
Random 3		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target

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).