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		45	0.50	55	0.00	52	0.05	62	0.05	77	0.03	60	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		40	0.52	27	0.00	49	0.09	48	0.09	85	0.03	52	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		62	0.42	60	0.00	64	0.07	51	0.07	66	0.04	54	0.05
Bacha 2000		29	0.57	26	0.00	30	0.07	29	0.42	79	0.03	35	0.11
Badura 1965		74	0.30	39	0.00	76	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.03	85	0.02
Barbosa 1983		43	0.51	56	0.00	27	0.08	35	0.33	43	0.08	26	0.16
Biret 1990		22	0.61	64	0.00	31	0.09	31	0.41	85	0.03	38	0.11
Blet 2003		57	0.45	85	0.00	57	0.05	63	0.05	85	0.03	58	0.04
Block 1995		48	0.47	37	0.00	37	0.08	43	0.19	75	0.03	46	0.08
Blumental 1952		14	0.64	12	0.02	9	0.11	14	0.51	49	0.05	27	0.16
Boshniakovich 1969		68	0.36	69	0.00	69	0.05	66	0.05	86	0.02	74	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		7	0.67	29	0.00	16	0.10	15	0.51	29	0.24	15	0.35
Bunin 1987		84	0.20	70	0.00	84	0.03	73	0.03	84	0.02	86	0.02
Bunin 1987b		86	0.18	82	0.00	83	0.02	88	0.02	82	0.02	75	0.02
Chiu 1999		21	0.62	35	0.00	29	0.09	30	0.41	42	0.14	19	0.24
Cohen 1997		32	0.55	47	0.00	21	0.09	26	0.43	7	0.46	8	0.44
Cortot 1951		67	0.36	86	0.00	71	0.07	52	0.07	86	0.02	65	0.04
Csalog 1996		28	0.57	3	0.06	8	0.11	3	0.56	5	0.47	3	0.51
Czerny 1949		79	0.29	83	0.00	74	0.02	78	0.02	79	0.03	83	0.02
Czerny 1990		13	0.64	24	0.00	18	0.09	19	0.47	49	0.04	30	0.14
Duchoud 2007		73	0.32	71	0.00	68	0.06	58	0.06	80	0.03	62	0.04
Ezaki 2006		24	0.59	22	0.00	41	0.08	38	0.25	85	0.03	40	0.09
Falvay 1989		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Farrell 1958		4	0.68	13	0.01	5	0.14	4	0.56	32	0.26	13	0.38
Ferenczy 1958		47	0.48	53	0.00	55	0.04	70	0.04	81	0.03	73	0.03
Fliere 1977		60	0.44	36	0.00	58	0.06	55	0.06	68	0.04	49	0.05
Fou 1978		16	0.64	18	0.01	32	0.10	20	0.46	78	0.03	32	0.12
Francois 1956		9	0.65	11	0.02	11	0.08	8	0.53	31	0.22	17	0.34
Friedman 1923		75	0.30	50	0.00	82	0.02	80	0.02	82	0.03	89	0.02
Friedman 1923b		80	0.29	17	0.01	81	0.02	84	0.02	83	0.03	87	0.02
Friedman 1930		70	0.34	77	0.00	80	0.03	77	0.03	78	0.03	71	0.03
Garcia 2007		49	0.46	58	0.00	56	0.05	64	0.05	63	0.04	63	0.04
Garcia 2007b		59	0.44	33	0.00	62	0.04	67	0.04	71	0.04	67	0.04
Gierzod 1998		53	0.45	59	0.00	59	0.06	59	0.06	75	0.03	61	0.04
Gornostaeva 1994		30	0.57	16	0.01	38	0.09	37	0.30	74	0.03	43	0.09
Groot 1988		18	0.63	28	0.00	14	0.08	6	0.54	33	0.25	14	0.37
Harasiewicz 1955		50	0.46	31	0.00	65	0.05	61	0.05	82	0.03	66	0.04
Hatto 1993		81	0.27	73	0.00	75	0.02	79	0.02	83	0.03	88	0.02
Hatto 1997		77	0.30	78	0.00	79	0.03	72	0.03	84	0.03	72	0.03
Horowitz 1949		82	0.26	87	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02	76	0.02
Indjic 1988		78	0.30	41	0.00	78	0.02	82	0.02	83	0.03	80	0.02
Kapell 1951		54	0.45	72	0.00	46	0.09	49	0.09	87	0.02	56	0.04
Kissin 1993		34	0.54	7	0.03	39	0.08	41	0.22	82	0.03	45	0.08
Kushner 1989		12	0.64	5	0.04	19	0.08	10	0.52	58	0.05	24	0.16
Luisada 1991		37	0.53	74	0.00	42	0.08	42	0.21	73	0.04	41	0.09
Lushtak 2004		17	0.63	6	0.03	20	0.10	17	0.49	48	0.06	23	0.17
Malcuzynski 1961		71	0.34	51	0.00	66	0.06	56	0.06	83	0.03	57	0.04
Magaloff 1978		2	0.70	40	0.00	6	0.16	7	0.54	7	0.43	6	0.48
Magin 1975		63	0.42	54	0.00	51	0.08	50	0.08	65	0.04	48	0.06
Michalowski 1933		76	0.30	67	0.00	73	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.02	78	0.02
Milkina 1970		11	0.64	34	0.00	15	0.09	12	0.52	80	0.03	33	0.12
Mohovich 1999		3	0.68	45	0.00	12	0.10	5	0.54	58	0.06	22	0.18
Moravec 1969		10	0.64	49	0.00	10	0.09	11	0.52	16	0.47	4	0.49
Morozova 2008		58	0.45	61	0.00	53	0.05	60	0.05	83	0.03	59	0.04
Neighaus 1950		66	0.38	68	0.00	70	0.05	65	0.05	76	0.04	64	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		65	0.39	65	0.00	54	0.04	71	0.04	75	0.03	68	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		64	0.39	30	0.00	60	0.04	69	0.04	81	0.03	70	0.03
Osinska 1989		19	0.62	23	0.00	34	0.12	25	0.43	81	0.03	36	0.11
Pachmann 1927		31	0.57	48	0.00	44	0.08	44	0.16	34	0.16	25	0.16
Paderewski 1930		27	0.57	79	0.00	35	0.09	33	0.37	79	0.03	37	0.11
Perlemuter 1992		20	0.62	9	0.02	36	0.09	34	0.36	57	0.04	31	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		33	0.55	4	0.04	3	0.10	16	0.50	7	0.46	7	0.48
Poblocka 1999		69	0.35	19	0.01	67	0.07	54	0.07	83	0.03	50	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		5	0.68	14	0.01	7	0.17	18	0.47	24	0.26	16	0.35
Rachmaninoff 1923		35	0.54	62	0.00	43	0.11	40	0.25	66	0.04	39	0.10
Rangell 2001		56	0.45	20	0.01	13	0.08	36	0.32	41	0.14	21	0.21
Richter 1976		87	0.11	32	0.00	88	0.02	83	0.02	86	0.02	77	0.02
Rosen 1989		25	0.59	43	0.00	33	0.11	23	0.44	54	0.05	28	0.15
Rosenthal 1930		52	0.45	80	0.00	40	0.08	39	0.25	67	0.03	42	0.09
Rosenthal 1931		39	0.52	81	0.00	25	0.13	24	0.43	19	0.38	11	0.40
Rosenthal 1931b		38	0.53	63	0.00	23	0.12	22	0.44	17	0.41	10	0.42
Rosenthal 1931c		44	0.50	42	0.00	22	0.11	28	0.42	17	0.37	12	0.39
Rosenthal 1931d		36	0.54	76	0.00	24	0.10	21	0.44	14	0.40	9	0.42
Rossi 2007		8	0.66	10	0.02	4	0.11	9	0.53	11	0.46	5	0.49
Rubinstein 1939		26	0.58	57	0.00	28	0.10	32	0.39	37	0.15	20	0.24
Rubinstein 1952		6	0.67	1	0.26	1	0.26	2	0.60	7	0.52	2	0.56
Rubinstein 1966		23	0.60	15	0.01	26	0.11	27	0.42	40	0.19	18	0.28
Schilhawsky 1960		83	0.22	88	0.00	85	0.03	76	0.03	87	0.02	81	0.02
Shebanova 2002		42	0.51	25	0.00	50	0.10	47	0.10	78	0.03	53	0.05
Smith 1975		15	0.64	46	0.00	17	0.08	13	0.52	52	0.04	29	0.14
Sokolov 2002		61	0.43	8	0.03	45	0.07	53	0.07	57	0.04	51	0.05
Sztompka 1959		51	0.46	52	0.00	61	0.04	68	0.04	76	0.03	69	0.03
Tomsic 1995		1	0.73	2	0.26	2	0.35	1	0.64	1	0.67	1	0.65
Uninsky 1932		72	0.32	89	0.00	77	0.02	85	0.02	86	0.03	82	0.02
Uninsky 1971		85	0.20	66	0.00	87	0.02	81	0.02	87	0.02	79	0.02
Wasowski 1980		55	0.45	21	0.01	63	0.06	57	0.06	84	0.03	55	0.04
Zak 1937		41	0.51	38	0.00	47	0.12	46	0.12	54	0.04	47	0.07
Zak 1951		46	0.49	44	0.00	48	0.13	45	0.13	57	0.05	44	0.08
Random 1		90	-0.29	84	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	76	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		89	-0.21	90	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	55	0.04	84	0.02
Random 3		88	-0.04	75	0.00	72	0.03	74	0.03	12	0.46	34	0.12

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).