Rosenthal 1931b

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		10	0.37	48	0.00	11	0.23	9	0.72	21	0.47	7	0.58
Anderszewski 2003		14	0.33	15	0.00	17	0.16	14	0.62	55	0.06	17	0.19
Ashkenazy 1981		32	0.26	42	0.00	31	0.11	29	0.44	71	0.05	26	0.15
Bacha 2000		17	0.32	23	0.00	22	0.21	20	0.53	23	0.33	12	0.42
Badura 1965		26	0.28	12	0.00	27	0.08	23	0.50	62	0.04	28	0.14
Barbosa 1983		48	0.22	43	0.00	70	0.03	71	0.03	81	0.03	79	0.03
Biret 1990		61	0.20	34	0.00	64	0.04	61	0.04	86	0.03	83	0.03
Blet 2003		50	0.21	49	0.00	52	0.05	51	0.05	81	0.03	56	0.04
Block 1995		66	0.19	16	0.00	48	0.05	53	0.05	83	0.03	59	0.04
Blumental 1952		15	0.33	28	0.00	12	0.18	17	0.58	59	0.06	18	0.19
Boshniakovich 1969		54	0.21	79	0.00	49	0.07	47	0.07	85	0.04	50	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		8	0.39	11	0.00	8	0.19	6	0.77	18	0.58	6	0.67
Bunin 1987		49	0.21	80	0.00	69	0.04	65	0.04	80	0.03	81	0.03
Bunin 1987b		51	0.21	56	0.00	65	0.04	62	0.04	62	0.04	54	0.04
Chiu 1999		56	0.21	44	0.00	60	0.04	59	0.04	79	0.04	53	0.04
Cohen 1997		20	0.31	31	0.00	14	0.14	16	0.59	17	0.58	8	0.58
Cortot 1951		43	0.23	72	0.00	54	0.05	50	0.05	57	0.06	52	0.05
Csalog 1996		55	0.21	17	0.00	62	0.05	56	0.05	75	0.04	55	0.04
Czerny 1949		59	0.20	73	0.00	50	0.05	52	0.05	61	0.05	49	0.05
Czerny 1990		77	0.17	81	0.00	72	0.03	73	0.03	85	0.03	82	0.03
Duchoud 2007		84	0.11	74	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	86	0.03	89	0.02
Ezaki 2006		9	0.37	5	0.00	7	0.17	10	0.72	34	0.40	9	0.54
Falvay 1989		18	0.32	38	0.00	28	0.08	28	0.46	75	0.04	27	0.14
Farrell 1958		63	0.20	50	0.00	63	0.04	63	0.04	80	0.02	69	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		7	0.40	6	0.00	9	0.15	8	0.75	7	0.76	5	0.75
Fliere 1977		30	0.27	65	0.00	34	0.09	32	0.37	79	0.04	30	0.12
Fou 1978		21	0.30	4	0.00	30	0.14	26	0.46	85	0.03	32	0.12
Francois 1956		57	0.20	66	0.00	32	0.10	33	0.32	39	0.16	15	0.23
Friedman 1923		62	0.20	51	0.00	68	0.05	55	0.05	86	0.03	61	0.04
Friedman 1923b		64	0.19	24	0.00	67	0.03	70	0.03	89	0.02	91	0.02
Friedman 1930		60	0.20	82	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.13	71	0.04	44	0.07
Garcia 2007		75	0.17	83	0.00	77	0.04	66	0.04	87	0.02	80	0.03
Garcia 2007b		82	0.13	67	0.00	78	0.04	64	0.04	86	0.02	85	0.03
Gierzod 1998		6	0.42	25	0.00	6	0.32	7	0.76	26	0.35	11	0.52
Gornostaeva 1994		41	0.23	75	0.00	38	0.08	37	0.25	82	0.03	39	0.09
Groot 1988		31	0.26	45	0.00	25	0.07	24	0.49	50	0.05	25	0.16
Harasiewicz 1955		40	0.24	29	0.00	41	0.08	40	0.18	87	0.02	46	0.06
Hatto 1993		38	0.25	52	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.11	88	0.02	51	0.05
Hatto 1997		27	0.28	57	0.00	36	0.07	34	0.31	60	0.05	34	0.12
Horowitz 1949		72	0.17	68	0.00	57	0.03	72	0.03	58	0.04	71	0.03
Indjic 1988		44	0.23	76	0.00	58	0.03	74	0.03	83	0.03	78	0.03
Kapell 1951		79	0.16	84	0.00	83	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.03	70	0.03
Kissin 1993		83	0.12	58	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	84	0.03	88	0.02
Kushner 1989		23	0.30	21	0.00	23	0.09	31	0.38	84	0.03	36	0.11
Luisada 1991		67	0.19	35	0.00	66	0.03	77	0.03	84	0.03	62	0.03
Lushtak 2004		22	0.30	26	0.00	20	0.18	18	0.58	59	0.05	22	0.17
Malcuzynski 1961		36	0.26	53	0.00	24	0.07	30	0.42	74	0.04	29	0.13
Magaloff 1978		34	0.26	85	0.00	37	0.07	36	0.29	58	0.05	31	0.12
Magin 1975		68	0.18	69	0.00	76	0.03	69	0.03	87	0.02	87	0.02
Michalowski 1933		86	0.10	36	0.00	84	0.03	79	0.03	76	0.03	77	0.03
Milkina 1970		33	0.26	59	0.00	39	0.08	38	0.23	56	0.05	37	0.11
Mohovich 1999		13	0.34	9	0.00	16	0.18	13	0.64	60	0.04	24	0.16
Moravec 1969		12	0.35	60	0.00	13	0.15	19	0.58	50	0.06	16	0.19
Morozova 2008		29	0.27	18	0.00	33	0.10	35	0.30	60	0.05	33	0.12
Neighaus 1950		47	0.22	54	0.00	46	0.08	46	0.08	86	0.02	60	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		39	0.25	46	0.00	18	0.16	21	0.53	36	0.24	13	0.36
Ohlsson 1999		69	0.18	61	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	69	0.04	76	0.03
Osinska 1989		53	0.21	86	0.00	55	0.04	58	0.04	82	0.03	64	0.03
Pachmann 1927		87	0.10	62	0.00	88	0.03	85	0.03	87	0.03	74	0.03
Paderewski 1930		81	0.14	27	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	69	0.04	73	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		70	0.17	39	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	80	0.03	63	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		78	0.16	40	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	70	0.04	68	0.03
Poblocka 1999		76	0.17	87	0.00	61	0.04	57	0.04	84	0.03	65	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		16	0.32	20	0.00	10	0.18	11	0.67	30	0.40	10	0.52
Rachmaninoff 1923		25	0.30	30	0.00	15	0.13	12	0.64	46	0.09	14	0.24
Rangell 2001		46	0.22	55	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.17	82	0.02	45	0.06
Richter 1976		80	0.15	19	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	86	0.03	72	0.03
Rosen 1989		19	0.31	63	0.00	29	0.10	25	0.48	82	0.03	35	0.12
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.60	7	0.00	4	0.83	4	0.93	1	0.90	4	0.91
Rosenthal 1931		1	0.85	1	0.77	1	0.77	1	0.99	1	0.99	1	0.99
Rosenthal 1931b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.76	3	0.04	3	0.90	3	0.97	1	0.97	3	0.97
Rosenthal 1931d		2	0.83	2	0.18	2	0.85	2	0.99	1	0.99	2	0.99
Rossi 2007		85	0.11	88	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	68	0.04	67	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		28	0.27	10	0.00	43	0.07	43	0.15	71	0.03	43	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		58	0.20	89	0.00	59	0.03	68	0.03	72	0.04	84	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		11	0.35	70	0.00	21	0.19	15	0.62	71	0.04	23	0.16
Schilhawsky 1960		52	0.21	90	0.00	53	0.05	54	0.05	56	0.05	48	0.05
Shebanova 2002		74	0.17	13	0.00	73	0.04	67	0.04	82	0.04	58	0.04
Smith 1975		35	0.26	37	0.00	26	0.07	27	0.46	56	0.06	21	0.17
Sokolov 2002		73	0.17	22	0.00	75	0.03	81	0.03	76	0.03	66	0.03
Sztompka 1959		71	0.17	77	0.00	56	0.04	60	0.04	87	0.03	75	0.03
Tomsic 1995		45	0.22	32	0.00	40	0.08	41	0.17	79	0.04	41	0.08
Uninsky 1932		65	0.19	41	0.00	51	0.06	49	0.06	86	0.03	57	0.04
Uninsky 1971		24	0.30	33	0.00	19	0.14	22	0.52	55	0.06	19	0.18
Wasowski 1980		88	0.07	71	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02
Zak 1937		42	0.23	64	0.00	47	0.06	48	0.06	66	0.04	47	0.05
Zak 1951		37	0.25	8	0.00	35	0.08	39	0.21	87	0.03	40	0.08
Average		5	0.45	91	0.00	5	0.46	5	0.85	74	0.04	20	0.18
Random 1		90	0.00	14	0.00	90	0.02	90	0.02	29	0.30	42	0.08
Random 2		89	0.04	47	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	12	0.41	38	0.09
Random 3		91	-0.08	78	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	76	0.03	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).