Rubinstein 1939

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		34	0.54	15	0.01	48	0.04	61	0.04	59	0.05	68	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		36	0.53	40	0.00	30	0.07	32	0.31	67	0.04	40	0.11
Ashkenazy 1981		39	0.52	8	0.01	66	0.05	51	0.05	68	0.04	72	0.04
Bacha 2000		33	0.54	28	0.00	33	0.06	30	0.32	12	0.41	7	0.36
Badura 1965		76	0.41	43	0.00	63	0.04	65	0.04	73	0.04	70	0.04
Barbosa 1983		25	0.57	78	0.00	24	0.08	25	0.35	27	0.41	6	0.38
Biret 1990		21	0.58	33	0.00	23	0.09	21	0.37	64	0.04	38	0.12
Blet 2003		61	0.45	65	0.00	58	0.03	81	0.03	53	0.06	65	0.04
Block 1995		73	0.41	84	0.00	54	0.05	50	0.05	57	0.05	57	0.05
Blumental 1952		22	0.58	54	0.00	15	0.06	26	0.34	67	0.04	37	0.12
Boshniakovich 1969		53	0.48	52	0.00	53	0.04	69	0.04	55	0.05	71	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		59	0.47	34	0.00	67	0.05	55	0.05	43	0.18	46	0.09
Bunin 1987		85	0.35	66	0.00	86	0.04	71	0.04	83	0.03	88	0.03
Bunin 1987b		86	0.33	87	0.00	87	0.04	66	0.04	86	0.03	80	0.03
Chiu 1999		48	0.49	79	0.00	68	0.04	64	0.04	84	0.03	78	0.03
Cohen 1997		43	0.51	74	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.23	9	0.43	13	0.31
Cortot 1951		62	0.45	42	0.00	60	0.03	75	0.03	36	0.25	51	0.09
Csalog 1996		67	0.43	72	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.10	38	0.15	35	0.12
Czerny 1949		26	0.56	6	0.01	32	0.07	19	0.39	52	0.06	28	0.15
Czerny 1990		6	0.61	73	0.00	5	0.10	10	0.42	39	0.19	15	0.28
Duchoud 2007		71	0.42	27	0.00	77	0.04	60	0.04	55	0.05	69	0.04
Ezaki 2006		20	0.58	3	0.04	14	0.07	18	0.39	61	0.05	29	0.14
Falvay 1989		37	0.52	53	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.14	40	0.21	22	0.17
Farrell 1958		7	0.61	37	0.00	3	0.28	4	0.57	10	0.54	4	0.55
Ferenczy 1958		80	0.39	88	0.00	81	0.03	86	0.03	68	0.03	85	0.03
Fliere 1977		14	0.59	63	0.00	21	0.10	14	0.41	74	0.04	33	0.13
Fou 1978		15	0.59	18	0.00	6	0.10	7	0.50	31	0.24	9	0.35
Francois 1956		68	0.43	80	0.00	57	0.04	59	0.04	58	0.05	75	0.04
Friedman 1923		44	0.50	21	0.00	51	0.05	53	0.05	42	0.12	55	0.08
Friedman 1923b		41	0.51	46	0.00	49	0.05	48	0.05	44	0.13	54	0.08
Friedman 1930		65	0.44	29	0.00	73	0.03	83	0.03	59	0.05	67	0.04
Garcia 2007		60	0.46	25	0.00	59	0.03	80	0.03	77	0.04	86	0.03
Garcia 2007b		42	0.51	41	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.20	48	0.05	45	0.10
Gierzod 1998		23	0.58	89	0.00	27	0.08	23	0.37	69	0.04	36	0.12
Gornostaeva 1994		52	0.48	36	0.00	45	0.06	47	0.06	76	0.03	73	0.04
Groot 1988		51	0.48	19	0.00	31	0.07	36	0.24	64	0.05	42	0.11
Harasiewicz 1955		30	0.55	47	0.00	35	0.07	31	0.32	76	0.04	43	0.11
Hatto 1993		17	0.59	35	0.00	19	0.06	20	0.39	43	0.11	19	0.21
Hatto 1997		8	0.60	20	0.00	12	0.08	9	0.43	49	0.06	27	0.16
Horowitz 1949		83	0.37	16	0.00	84	0.03	87	0.03	73	0.04	81	0.03
Indjic 1988		10	0.60	48	0.00	20	0.08	16	0.39	56	0.05	30	0.14
Kapell 1951		27	0.56	10	0.01	26	0.11	29	0.33	53	0.05	34	0.13
Kissin 1993		18	0.59	68	0.00	16	0.06	15	0.40	46	0.07	23	0.17
Kushner 1989		9	0.60	44	0.00	10	0.10	8	0.49	58	0.05	26	0.16
Luisada 1991		13	0.59	11	0.01	22	0.07	22	0.37	48	0.07	24	0.16
Lushtak 2004		19	0.58	39	0.00	11	0.10	24	0.36	29	0.29	12	0.32
Malcuzynski 1961		72	0.41	38	0.00	55	0.05	54	0.05	60	0.04	63	0.04
Magaloff 1978		24	0.57	49	0.00	25	0.11	28	0.33	19	0.34	11	0.33
Magin 1975		46	0.50	50	0.00	52	0.06	45	0.06	84	0.03	62	0.04
Michalowski 1933		87	0.26	81	0.00	85	0.03	85	0.03	80	0.03	83	0.03
Milkina 1970		3	0.62	7	0.01	4	0.47	3	0.67	17	0.50	3	0.58
Mohovich 1999		12	0.60	26	0.00	7	0.10	5	0.53	25	0.43	5	0.48
Moravec 1969		64	0.44	69	0.00	70	0.03	73	0.03	48	0.06	58	0.04
Morozova 2008		11	0.60	9	0.01	17	0.06	13	0.41	32	0.29	10	0.34
Neighaus 1950		50	0.48	12	0.01	62	0.04	67	0.04	80	0.04	74	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		79	0.39	30	0.00	76	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.03	79	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		40	0.52	17	0.00	50	0.04	58	0.04	79	0.04	64	0.04
Osinska 1989		16	0.59	62	0.00	9	0.10	6	0.50	51	0.07	21	0.19
Pachmann 1927		75	0.41	57	0.00	79	0.04	72	0.04	37	0.21	48	0.09
Paderewski 1930		69	0.42	85	0.00	69	0.05	56	0.05	40	0.13	53	0.08
Perlemuter 1992		56	0.47	83	0.00	72	0.03	82	0.03	87	0.03	76	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		81	0.38	58	0.00	80	0.04	62	0.04	70	0.04	61	0.04
Poblocka 1999		49	0.48	82	0.00	47	0.04	57	0.04	63	0.05	60	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		29	0.55	13	0.01	8	0.10	17	0.39	20	0.31	8	0.35
Rachmaninoff 1923		38	0.52	5	0.01	36	0.07	38	0.20	67	0.04	47	0.09
Rangell 2001		70	0.42	70	0.00	42	0.05	44	0.09	39	0.21	32	0.14
Richter 1976		82	0.37	59	0.00	83	0.03	79	0.03	63	0.04	82	0.03
Rosen 1989		28	0.55	45	0.00	28	0.07	33	0.31	49	0.06	31	0.14
Rosenthal 1930		84	0.35	90	0.00	82	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		77	0.40	75	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	27	0.28	49	0.09
Rosenthal 1931b		78	0.39	76	0.00	78	0.05	49	0.05	39	0.18	52	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		63	0.45	32	0.00	44	0.05	43	0.10	21	0.44	20	0.21
Rosenthal 1931d		74	0.41	31	0.00	75	0.03	74	0.03	24	0.41	41	0.11
Rossi 2007		54	0.48	77	0.00	46	0.06	46	0.06	14	0.42	25	0.16
Rubinstein 1939		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rubinstein 1952		2	0.74	1	0.57	1	0.57	1	0.78	2	0.75	1	0.76
Rubinstein 1966		1	0.75	2	0.19	2	0.67	2	0.76	2	0.70	2	0.73
Schilhawsky 1960		57	0.47	60	0.00	65	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.04	66	0.04
Shebanova 2002		35	0.54	23	0.00	34	0.06	34	0.27	68	0.04	44	0.10
Smith 1975		31	0.54	71	0.00	29	0.09	27	0.34	32	0.24	14	0.29
Sokolov 2002		55	0.48	61	0.00	61	0.04	68	0.04	67	0.03	77	0.03
Sztompka 1959		32	0.54	24	0.00	38	0.08	35	0.26	63	0.05	39	0.11
Tomsic 1995		47	0.49	51	0.00	40	0.06	40	0.15	19	0.48	16	0.27
Uninsky 1932		58	0.47	22	0.00	64	0.05	52	0.05	57	0.05	56	0.05
Uninsky 1971		66	0.44	67	0.00	71	0.03	84	0.03	76	0.04	84	0.03
Wasowski 1980		45	0.50	55	0.00	56	0.04	70	0.04	67	0.05	59	0.04
Zak 1937		4	0.62	14	0.01	18	0.06	12	0.41	43	0.11	18	0.21
Zak 1951		5	0.62	4	0.02	13	0.08	11	0.42	42	0.12	17	0.22
Random 1		88	-0.01	64	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	12	0.44	50	0.09
Random 2		89	-0.07	56	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	79	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3		90	-0.11	86	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	69	0.04	89	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).