Osinska 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		37	0.62	70	0.00	44	0.07	41	0.14	33	0.27	50	0.19
Anderszewski 2003		6	0.72	9	0.02	8	0.17	5	0.66	1	0.71	5	0.68
Ashkenazy 1981		67	0.53	88	0.00	70	0.04	66	0.04	58	0.05	86	0.04
Bacha 2000		71	0.50	83	0.00	73	0.07	56	0.07	30	0.22	61	0.12
Badura 1965		64	0.54	71	0.00	65	0.04	71	0.04	38	0.24	69	0.10
Barbosa 1983		57	0.55	57	0.00	40	0.06	43	0.14	11	0.57	39	0.28
Biret 1990		16	0.68	5	0.05	7	0.24	12	0.60	2	0.65	12	0.62
Blet 2003		66	0.53	54	0.00	64	0.04	67	0.04	21	0.32	67	0.11
Block 1995		48	0.58	58	0.00	49	0.06	59	0.06	10	0.52	53	0.18
Blumental 1952		45	0.58	24	0.00	32	0.07	32	0.26	21	0.29	42	0.27
Boshniakovich 1969		23	0.66	31	0.00	29	0.13	28	0.43	21	0.48	29	0.45
Brailowsky 1960		60	0.55	32	0.00	68	0.04	75	0.04	29	0.36	62	0.12
Bunin 1987		85	0.42	62	0.00	80	0.03	84	0.03	45	0.06	87	0.04
Bunin 1987b		86	0.42	37	0.00	79	0.03	80	0.03	52	0.05	81	0.04
Chiu 1999		62	0.54	52	0.00	69	0.04	73	0.04	43	0.11	74	0.07
Cohen 1997		87	0.40	74	0.00	76	0.03	77	0.03	30	0.22	73	0.08
Cortot 1951		69	0.51	43	0.00	72	0.06	58	0.06	15	0.50	55	0.17
Csalog 1996		61	0.54	63	0.00	55	0.07	52	0.07	8	0.51	48	0.19
Czerny 1949		15	0.69	38	0.00	26	0.16	26	0.49	9	0.58	24	0.53
Czerny 1990		3	0.74	4	0.09	5	0.19	6	0.65	5	0.73	4	0.69
Duchoud 2007		84	0.42	75	0.00	75	0.03	81	0.03	51	0.06	84	0.04
Ezaki 2006		8	0.71	11	0.01	15	0.09	25	0.50	4	0.71	15	0.60
Falvay 1989		22	0.67	23	0.00	33	0.07	31	0.33	4	0.60	30	0.44
Farrell 1958		33	0.62	12	0.01	9	0.16	14	0.58	2	0.68	8	0.63
Ferenczy 1958		39	0.61	30	0.00	58	0.08	47	0.08	8	0.55	45	0.21
Fliere 1977		4	0.74	13	0.01	3	0.16	3	0.73	2	0.60	6	0.66
Fou 1978		18	0.68	44	0.00	25	0.19	23	0.50	5	0.60	23	0.55
Francois 1956		52	0.58	33	0.00	59	0.09	45	0.09	14	0.52	44	0.22
Friedman 1923		63	0.54	76	0.00	63	0.05	63	0.05	32	0.33	60	0.13
Friedman 1923b		58	0.55	77	0.00	62	0.05	61	0.05	30	0.39	57	0.14
Friedman 1930		50	0.58	59	0.00	61	0.04	70	0.04	27	0.42	59	0.13
Garcia 2007		51	0.58	27	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.14	6	0.58	40	0.28
Garcia 2007b		32	0.63	6	0.04	13	0.10	19	0.51	3	0.61	22	0.56
Gierzod 1998		1	0.78	1	0.32	1	0.32	1	0.80	3	0.75	1	0.77
Gornostaeva 1994		24	0.66	18	0.01	31	0.07	36	0.23	11	0.56	33	0.36
Groot 1988		55	0.56	48	0.00	36	0.06	34	0.24	9	0.47	35	0.34
Harasiewicz 1955		5	0.74	10	0.02	6	0.20	4	0.71	1	0.76	3	0.73
Hatto 1993		20	0.67	34	0.00	20	0.14	10	0.61	4	0.58	19	0.59
Hatto 1997		14	0.69	78	0.00	19	0.12	9	0.63	4	0.59	14	0.61
Horowitz 1949		75	0.48	69	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	48	0.08	80	0.05
Indjic 1988		13	0.69	17	0.01	17	0.11	8	0.64	4	0.59	13	0.61
Kapell 1951		26	0.66	64	0.00	22	0.10	21	0.51	5	0.49	27	0.50
Kissin 1993		21	0.67	53	0.00	27	0.17	27	0.47	18	0.55	26	0.51
Kushner 1989		7	0.71	3	0.10	4	0.14	7	0.64	2	0.69	7	0.66
Luisada 1991		35	0.62	84	0.00	43	0.06	39	0.16	17	0.40	43	0.25
Lushtak 2004		28	0.65	8	0.03	21	0.10	24	0.50	4	0.66	21	0.57
Malcuzynski 1961		53	0.58	28	0.00	50	0.06	57	0.06	14	0.46	54	0.17
Magaloff 1978		40	0.60	65	0.00	48	0.07	49	0.07	9	0.46	52	0.18
Magin 1975		36	0.62	79	0.00	34	0.06	38	0.21	28	0.34	41	0.27
Michalowski 1933		81	0.45	60	0.00	81	0.04	72	0.04	57	0.05	83	0.04
Milkina 1970		2	0.75	2	0.15	2	0.30	2	0.76	1	0.75	2	0.75
Mohovich 1999		27	0.65	14	0.01	23	0.13	20	0.51	3	0.68	18	0.59
Moravec 1969		65	0.54	45	0.00	66	0.03	82	0.03	22	0.38	65	0.11
Morozova 2008		47	0.58	35	0.00	45	0.08	46	0.08	13	0.45	49	0.19
Neighaus 1950		42	0.60	42	0.00	56	0.07	54	0.07	28	0.29	58	0.14
Niedzielski 1931		72	0.50	29	0.00	67	0.03	78	0.03	44	0.09	79	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		34	0.62	26	0.00	30	0.10	30	0.39	18	0.46	31	0.42
Osinska 1989		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Pachmann 1927		74	0.48	39	0.00	87	0.04	69	0.04	42	0.15	72	0.08
Paderewski 1930		80	0.45	89	0.00	74	0.05	64	0.05	32	0.25	66	0.11
Perlemuter 1992		31	0.63	80	0.00	39	0.06	33	0.25	2	0.62	32	0.39
Pierdomenico 2008		56	0.55	61	0.00	38	0.05	44	0.13	3	0.60	38	0.28
Poblocka 1999		30	0.63	25	0.00	28	0.11	29	0.42	9	0.55	28	0.48
Rabcewiczowa 1932		59	0.55	72	0.00	54	0.08	48	0.08	38	0.17	63	0.12
Rachmaninoff 1923		44	0.59	49	0.00	47	0.05	60	0.05	37	0.19	68	0.10
Rangell 2001		70	0.51	55	0.00	57	0.07	50	0.07	7	0.54	51	0.19
Richter 1976		76	0.48	66	0.00	78	0.03	76	0.03	50	0.06	82	0.04
Rosen 1989		9	0.70	46	0.00	16	0.11	16	0.57	5	0.63	17	0.60
Rosenthal 1930		79	0.45	47	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	68	0.03	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		77	0.45	21	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	32	0.25	70	0.09
Rosenthal 1931b		82	0.44	85	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	38	0.18	75	0.07
Rosenthal 1931c		78	0.45	67	0.00	83	0.04	74	0.04	41	0.14	76	0.07
Rosenthal 1931d		83	0.43	86	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	37	0.21	77	0.06
Rossi 2007		38	0.61	15	0.01	41	0.05	40	0.14	1	0.67	37	0.31
Rubinstein 1939		43	0.59	81	0.00	51	0.07	51	0.07	6	0.50	47	0.19
Rubinstein 1952		54	0.57	50	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.23	12	0.55	34	0.36
Rubinstein 1966		12	0.69	7	0.04	11	0.11	13	0.59	3	0.68	10	0.63
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.60	56	0.00	46	0.05	62	0.05	32	0.30	64	0.12
Shebanova 2002		19	0.67	16	0.01	10	0.11	11	0.61	11	0.54	20	0.57
Smith 1975		29	0.64	19	0.00	35	0.07	37	0.22	9	0.47	36	0.32
Sokolov 2002		73	0.49	90	0.00	71	0.05	65	0.05	55	0.05	78	0.05
Sztompka 1959		25	0.66	36	0.00	24	0.14	22	0.51	20	0.52	25	0.51
Tomsic 1995		49	0.58	41	0.00	52	0.07	55	0.07	7	0.60	46	0.20
Uninsky 1932		68	0.52	68	0.00	60	0.04	68	0.04	42	0.19	71	0.09
Uninsky 1971		46	0.58	51	0.00	53	0.07	53	0.07	30	0.32	56	0.15
Wasowski 1980		11	0.69	22	0.00	18	0.10	18	0.53	1	0.68	16	0.60
Zak 1937		10	0.70	20	0.00	12	0.11	17	0.57	2	0.70	9	0.63
Zak 1951		17	0.68	40	0.00	14	0.09	15	0.57	4	0.67	11	0.62
Random 1		88	-0.07	87	0.00	88	0.01	88	0.01	33	0.16	85	0.04
Random 2		89	-0.08	73	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	72	0.03	89	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.11	82	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	50	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).