Falvay 1989

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		44	0.50	40	0.00	55	0.08	49	0.08	81	0.03	57	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		24	0.57	27	0.00	30	0.08	29	0.36	49	0.05	42	0.13
Ashkenazy 1981		63	0.43	75	0.00	68	0.05	66	0.05	88	0.02	78	0.03
Bacha 2000		49	0.48	44	0.00	53	0.06	57	0.06	60	0.04	53	0.05
Badura 1965		73	0.38	41	0.00	72	0.03	77	0.03	87	0.02	88	0.02
Barbosa 1983		31	0.55	49	0.00	12	0.14	25	0.41	30	0.39	15	0.40
Biret 1990		20	0.59	36	0.00	26	0.09	21	0.46	63	0.04	39	0.14
Blet 2003		62	0.44	84	0.00	65	0.05	63	0.05	85	0.02	73	0.03
Block 1995		35	0.54	8	0.02	17	0.07	23	0.46	15	0.46	9	0.46
Blumental 1952		17	0.60	9	0.02	6	0.11	7	0.56	27	0.24	21	0.37
Boshniakovich 1969		60	0.44	79	0.00	60	0.06	62	0.06	62	0.05	58	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		7	0.63	12	0.01	19	0.08	20	0.47	7	0.66	5	0.56
Bunin 1987		79	0.33	80	0.00	78	0.03	86	0.03	87	0.03	79	0.03
Bunin 1987b		82	0.31	62	0.00	79	0.04	71	0.04	85	0.03	68	0.03
Chiu 1999		23	0.57	76	0.00	32	0.06	30	0.32	23	0.27	26	0.29
Cohen 1997		43	0.50	25	0.00	36	0.07	36	0.25	2	0.52	23	0.36
Cortot 1951		85	0.30	63	0.00	84	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.03	82	0.03
Csalog 1996		5	0.64	2	0.17	2	0.37	2	0.64	1	0.72	1	0.68
Czerny 1949		71	0.39	70	0.00	73	0.03	79	0.03	71	0.04	76	0.03
Czerny 1990		4	0.66	3	0.08	5	0.26	5	0.60	33	0.31	14	0.43
Duchoud 2007		81	0.32	56	0.00	77	0.03	85	0.03	69	0.04	77	0.03
Ezaki 2006		8	0.63	16	0.01	25	0.12	12	0.50	39	0.18	25	0.30
Falvay 1989		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Farrell 1958		27	0.57	29	0.00	16	0.07	15	0.49	30	0.37	13	0.43
Ferenczy 1958		33	0.55	50	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.16	21	0.40	27	0.25
Fliere 1977		34	0.55	52	0.00	44	0.07	44	0.14	73	0.04	48	0.07
Fou 1978		9	0.63	33	0.00	24	0.09	17	0.48	43	0.11	29	0.23
Francois 1956		56	0.46	59	0.00	52	0.09	46	0.09	54	0.05	50	0.07
Friedman 1923		78	0.34	64	0.00	82	0.03	78	0.03	74	0.04	83	0.03
Friedman 1923b		80	0.33	10	0.01	81	0.03	81	0.03	74	0.04	80	0.03
Friedman 1930		72	0.39	81	0.00	74	0.03	73	0.03	82	0.03	75	0.03
Garcia 2007		64	0.43	71	0.00	62	0.05	69	0.05	71	0.04	65	0.04
Garcia 2007b		55	0.46	42	0.00	57	0.06	60	0.06	45	0.06	52	0.06
Gierzod 1998		25	0.57	65	0.00	41	0.07	41	0.19	75	0.03	46	0.08
Gornostaeva 1994		26	0.57	5	0.05	13	0.08	13	0.50	29	0.29	18	0.38
Groot 1988		37	0.54	47	0.00	22	0.09	18	0.47	22	0.31	19	0.38
Harasiewicz 1955		36	0.54	48	0.00	43	0.08	43	0.16	72	0.04	47	0.08
Hatto 1993		69	0.41	54	0.00	70	0.06	58	0.06	81	0.03	67	0.04
Hatto 1997		66	0.42	82	0.00	71	0.06	61	0.06	82	0.03	64	0.04
Horowitz 1949		83	0.30	85	0.00	86	0.03	80	0.03	80	0.03	70	0.03
Indjic 1988		65	0.42	34	0.00	69	0.04	72	0.04	74	0.03	72	0.03
Kapell 1951		38	0.54	39	0.00	39	0.11	35	0.27	50	0.06	41	0.13
Kissin 1993		28	0.56	14	0.01	31	0.08	37	0.24	68	0.04	45	0.10
Kushner 1989		1	0.67	6	0.05	3	0.18	1	0.69	22	0.52	3	0.60
Luisada 1991		29	0.56	60	0.00	37	0.08	34	0.29	63	0.05	43	0.12
Lushtak 2004		13	0.62	21	0.01	8	0.10	6	0.56	22	0.42	7	0.48
Malcuzynski 1961		67	0.41	46	0.00	59	0.05	70	0.05	87	0.02	69	0.03
Magaloff 1978		18	0.59	32	0.00	18	0.07	19	0.47	13	0.42	12	0.44
Magin 1975		45	0.50	37	0.00	46	0.09	47	0.09	73	0.03	56	0.05
Michalowski 1933		87	0.27	86	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	87	0.03	85	0.02
Milkina 1970		14	0.61	31	0.00	14	0.08	10	0.52	56	0.06	32	0.18
Mohovich 1999		6	0.63	23	0.01	9	0.09	8	0.55	26	0.42	8	0.48
Moravec 1969		11	0.62	18	0.01	15	0.09	11	0.51	12	0.57	6	0.54
Morozova 2008		59	0.46	66	0.00	58	0.06	59	0.06	82	0.03	63	0.04
Neighaus 1950		70	0.39	72	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	84	0.03	81	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.36	53	0.00	67	0.07	51	0.07	62	0.04	55	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		58	0.46	30	0.00	56	0.05	68	0.05	78	0.04	62	0.04
Osinska 1989		2	0.67	4	0.06	4	0.18	4	0.60	31	0.33	10	0.44
Pachmann 1927		57	0.46	77	0.00	63	0.05	64	0.05	22	0.38	38	0.14
Paderewski 1930		74	0.36	78	0.00	64	0.05	67	0.05	56	0.04	60	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		30	0.56	83	0.00	40	0.08	39	0.21	45	0.08	40	0.13
Pierdomenico 2008		41	0.51	26	0.00	20	0.06	31	0.31	16	0.44	20	0.37
Poblocka 1999		42	0.51	11	0.01	45	0.08	48	0.08	51	0.05	51	0.06
Rabcewiczowa 1932		32	0.55	19	0.01	7	0.13	24	0.45	19	0.32	16	0.38
Rachmaninoff 1923		53	0.47	61	0.00	50	0.07	52	0.07	83	0.03	54	0.05
Rangell 2001		48	0.48	20	0.01	27	0.09	38	0.22	37	0.27	28	0.24
Richter 1976		86	0.29	38	0.00	87	0.03	74	0.03	83	0.02	84	0.02
Rosen 1989		16	0.60	57	0.00	23	0.09	16	0.48	52	0.06	36	0.17
Rosenthal 1930		68	0.41	87	0.00	66	0.06	55	0.06	64	0.03	66	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		50	0.48	67	0.00	47	0.06	53	0.06	18	0.47	35	0.17
Rosenthal 1931b		52	0.47	88	0.00	49	0.07	50	0.07	18	0.47	33	0.18
Rosenthal 1931c		47	0.49	68	0.00	35	0.07	32	0.30	19	0.46	22	0.37
Rosenthal 1931d		51	0.47	45	0.00	48	0.06	56	0.06	18	0.50	37	0.17
Rossi 2007		39	0.53	28	0.00	28	0.08	26	0.40	9	0.48	11	0.44
Rubinstein 1939		40	0.52	51	0.00	38	0.10	40	0.21	41	0.14	34	0.17
Rubinstein 1952		3	0.66	1	0.32	1	0.32	3	0.62	8	0.60	2	0.61
Rubinstein 1966		10	0.62	22	0.01	11	0.11	14	0.49	32	0.30	17	0.38
Schilhawsky 1960		84	0.30	55	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	86	0.03	74	0.03
Shebanova 2002		22	0.57	15	0.01	29	0.09	33	0.30	74	0.04	44	0.11
Smith 1975		15	0.60	43	0.00	21	0.07	22	0.46	31	0.25	24	0.34
Sokolov 2002		61	0.44	17	0.01	51	0.09	45	0.09	52	0.05	49	0.07
Sztompka 1959		54	0.47	69	0.00	61	0.05	65	0.05	87	0.03	61	0.04
Tomsic 1995		12	0.62	35	0.00	10	0.13	9	0.53	2	0.68	4	0.60
Uninsky 1932		76	0.35	73	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	87	0.02	86	0.02
Uninsky 1971		77	0.35	58	0.00	76	0.03	84	0.03	81	0.04	71	0.03
Wasowski 1980		46	0.50	24	0.01	54	0.06	54	0.06	85	0.03	59	0.04
Zak 1937		19	0.59	13	0.01	34	0.11	27	0.38	41	0.13	30	0.22
Zak 1951		21	0.58	7	0.02	33	0.07	28	0.37	43	0.11	31	0.20
Random 1		90	-0.15	89	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	68	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		88	-0.09	90	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	76	0.03	87	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.12	74	0.00	89	0.01	88	0.01	49	0.04	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).