Fliere 1977

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		4	0.74	50	0.00	12	0.13	15	0.48	7	0.58	19	0.53
Anderszewski 2003		6	0.72	5	0.04	18	0.13	19	0.42	2	0.66	18	0.53
Ashkenazy 1981		50	0.61	80	0.00	45	0.07	47	0.07	14	0.46	48	0.18
Bacha 2000		71	0.53	49	0.00	63	0.04	68	0.04	6	0.49	62	0.14
Badura 1965		53	0.61	12	0.02	53	0.04	69	0.04	17	0.47	69	0.14
Barbosa 1983		63	0.55	59	0.00	57	0.05	59	0.05	15	0.53	55	0.16
Biret 1990		37	0.65	8	0.03	24	0.08	21	0.36	9	0.52	26	0.43
Blet 2003		41	0.64	22	0.01	47	0.06	52	0.06	1	0.67	47	0.20
Block 1995		58	0.57	30	0.00	31	0.06	40	0.17	4	0.61	38	0.32
Blumental 1952		49	0.61	31	0.00	46	0.07	46	0.07	11	0.41	52	0.17
Boshniakovich 1969		11	0.71	4	0.05	5	0.11	6	0.54	3	0.64	4	0.59
Brailowsky 1960		33	0.65	3	0.05	28	0.09	37	0.19	1	0.78	30	0.38
Bunin 1987		76	0.50	86	0.00	72	0.06	49	0.06	13	0.48	53	0.17
Bunin 1987b		80	0.49	70	0.00	71	0.04	70	0.04	12	0.48	63	0.14
Chiu 1999		60	0.57	58	0.00	64	0.04	64	0.04	8	0.40	72	0.13
Cohen 1997		87	0.38	78	0.00	87	0.04	71	0.04	37	0.13	85	0.07
Cortot 1951		70	0.53	87	0.00	70	0.04	62	0.04	11	0.56	60	0.15
Csalog 1996		73	0.52	16	0.01	67	0.05	53	0.05	15	0.42	67	0.14
Czerny 1949		21	0.69	67	0.00	23	0.08	20	0.37	17	0.54	24	0.45
Czerny 1990		25	0.69	52	0.00	33	0.06	31	0.23	14	0.50	35	0.34
Duchoud 2007		75	0.50	55	0.00	60	0.04	79	0.04	8	0.48	68	0.14
Ezaki 2006		18	0.70	21	0.01	34	0.07	32	0.22	9	0.61	32	0.37
Falvay 1989		67	0.55	53	0.00	77	0.04	73	0.04	44	0.14	82	0.07
Farrell 1958		61	0.56	56	0.00	55	0.05	61	0.05	22	0.43	57	0.15
Ferenczy 1958		45	0.62	40	0.00	66	0.07	48	0.07	3	0.61	46	0.21
Fliere 1977		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Fou 1978		26	0.68	17	0.01	22	0.08	22	0.35	1	0.64	21	0.47
Francois 1956		68	0.54	65	0.00	73	0.04	77	0.04	23	0.44	75	0.13
Friedman 1923		46	0.61	43	0.00	62	0.05	60	0.05	22	0.43	61	0.15
Friedman 1923b		48	0.61	61	0.00	61	0.04	75	0.04	28	0.42	74	0.13
Friedman 1930		44	0.62	81	0.00	65	0.05	56	0.05	25	0.44	58	0.15
Garcia 2007		52	0.61	72	0.00	52	0.05	55	0.05	2	0.61	51	0.17
Garcia 2007b		43	0.63	46	0.00	41	0.07	35	0.20	5	0.60	34	0.35
Gierzod 1998		1	0.79	1	0.43	1	0.42	1	0.75	2	0.77	1	0.76
Gornostaeva 1994		36	0.65	35	0.00	36	0.06	41	0.17	8	0.58	40	0.31
Groot 1988		55	0.60	11	0.02	29	0.06	36	0.20	2	0.59	36	0.34
Harasiewicz 1955		8	0.72	18	0.01	15	0.10	12	0.50	13	0.60	14	0.55
Hatto 1993		14	0.71	2	0.10	2	0.19	3	0.55	5	0.57	10	0.56
Hatto 1997		10	0.71	34	0.00	4	0.19	7	0.53	5	0.56	16	0.54
Horowitz 1949		66	0.55	88	0.00	69	0.04	78	0.04	10	0.51	65	0.14
Indjic 1988		9	0.72	27	0.00	3	0.14	5	0.54	5	0.56	13	0.55
Kapell 1951		29	0.68	10	0.02	14	0.11	18	0.46	3	0.61	17	0.53
Kissin 1993		30	0.67	42	0.00	40	0.08	33	0.22	22	0.50	37	0.33
Kushner 1989		15	0.71	38	0.00	21	0.09	25	0.34	10	0.61	22	0.46
Luisada 1991		7	0.72	48	0.00	16	0.10	16	0.47	1	0.76	3	0.60
Lushtak 2004		32	0.66	28	0.00	35	0.07	30	0.25	5	0.65	29	0.40
Malcuzynski 1961		59	0.57	77	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	17	0.41	64	0.14
Magaloff 1978		54	0.60	32	0.00	37	0.06	42	0.14	6	0.50	42	0.26
Magin 1975		5	0.72	39	0.00	17	0.17	11	0.51	3	0.64	7	0.57
Michalowski 1933		65	0.55	47	0.00	68	0.04	65	0.04	13	0.47	66	0.14
Milkina 1970		24	0.69	36	0.00	32	0.06	27	0.32	19	0.49	27	0.40
Mohovich 1999		31	0.67	24	0.00	42	0.08	34	0.21	2	0.68	31	0.38
Moravec 1969		77	0.49	51	0.00	81	0.04	72	0.04	37	0.19	80	0.09
Morozova 2008		35	0.65	68	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.12	14	0.45	44	0.23
Neighaus 1950		40	0.64	79	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.11	16	0.51	43	0.24
Niedzielski 1931		47	0.61	69	0.00	58	0.06	51	0.06	16	0.46	49	0.17
Ohlsson 1999		27	0.68	71	0.00	13	0.11	13	0.49	6	0.62	12	0.55
Osinska 1989		2	0.74	14	0.02	6	0.10	2	0.60	3	0.73	2	0.66
Pachmann 1927		74	0.51	73	0.00	85	0.03	83	0.03	18	0.42	77	0.11
Paderewski 1930		84	0.44	62	0.00	86	0.04	76	0.04	39	0.13	84	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		51	0.61	74	0.00	51	0.04	67	0.04	4	0.59	56	0.15
Pierdomenico 2008		85	0.44	82	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	39	0.23	83	0.07
Poblocka 1999		17	0.70	23	0.00	11	0.12	9	0.52	2	0.65	5	0.58
Rabcewiczowa 1932		57	0.58	20	0.01	38	0.06	39	0.18	8	0.51	41	0.30
Rachmaninoff 1923		22	0.69	9	0.02	25	0.10	26	0.33	2	0.61	23	0.45
Rangell 2001		86	0.39	89	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	51	0.05	87	0.04
Richter 1976		38	0.64	44	0.00	49	0.08	45	0.08	8	0.61	45	0.22
Rosen 1989		12	0.71	29	0.00	19	0.11	17	0.47	2	0.71	6	0.58
Rosenthal 1930		62	0.56	66	0.00	74	0.04	66	0.04	10	0.56	59	0.15
Rosenthal 1931		81	0.48	54	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	22	0.39	78	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		78	0.49	41	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	19	0.45	76	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		69	0.54	63	0.00	75	0.05	54	0.05	8	0.59	54	0.17
Rosenthal 1931d		83	0.47	64	0.00	78	0.02	86	0.02	25	0.40	81	0.09
Rossi 2007		82	0.48	60	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	46	0.08	86	0.05
Rubinstein 1939		56	0.59	90	0.00	59	0.04	74	0.04	14	0.41	73	0.13
Rubinstein 1952		72	0.52	26	0.00	50	0.05	57	0.05	23	0.41	70	0.14
Rubinstein 1966		39	0.64	45	0.00	48	0.06	50	0.06	23	0.46	50	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		3	0.74	15	0.01	9	0.09	10	0.52	7	0.60	9	0.56
Shebanova 2002		13	0.71	7	0.03	7	0.13	4	0.54	5	0.61	8	0.57
Smith 1975		19	0.70	6	0.03	27	0.08	23	0.35	1	0.73	20	0.51
Sokolov 2002		64	0.55	33	0.00	54	0.04	63	0.04	16	0.42	71	0.13
Sztompka 1959		16	0.71	13	0.02	8	0.10	8	0.52	10	0.59	11	0.55
Tomsic 1995		79	0.49	75	0.00	76	0.03	82	0.03	33	0.33	79	0.10
Uninsky 1932		42	0.64	37	0.00	39	0.06	38	0.18	8	0.55	39	0.31
Uninsky 1971		23	0.69	19	0.01	10	0.09	14	0.48	11	0.61	15	0.54
Wasowski 1980		34	0.65	25	0.00	30	0.06	29	0.25	9	0.54	33	0.37
Zak 1937		20	0.69	83	0.00	20	0.09	24	0.35	9	0.55	25	0.44
Zak 1951		28	0.68	57	0.00	26	0.10	28	0.31	11	0.52	28	0.40
Random 1		90	-0.10	84	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	47	0.04	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.09	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	63	0.03	89	0.02
Random 3		88	-0.07	76	0.00	88	0.01	88	0.01	40	0.12	88	0.03

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).