Magaloff 1978

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		26	0.62	16	0.01	37	0.05	33	0.22	46	0.06	37	0.11
Anderszewski 2003		33	0.62	63	0.00	51	0.06	50	0.06	78	0.03	70	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		59	0.52	82	0.00	66	0.05	67	0.05	76	0.03	76	0.04
Bacha 2000		31	0.62	17	0.01	28	0.06	32	0.22	43	0.08	31	0.13
Badura 1965		80	0.41	85	0.00	82	0.03	82	0.03	61	0.05	74	0.04
Barbosa 1983		60	0.51	37	0.00	44	0.08	42	0.16	48	0.06	42	0.10
Biret 1990		9	0.69	41	0.00	20	0.07	24	0.28	49	0.05	34	0.12
Blet 2003		61	0.51	59	0.00	71	0.04	69	0.04	76	0.03	81	0.03
Block 1995		79	0.41	81	0.00	60	0.05	59	0.05	80	0.03	75	0.04
Blumental 1952		15	0.66	20	0.01	21	0.09	17	0.36	60	0.04	33	0.12
Boshniakovich 1969		64	0.51	48	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	57	0.05	56	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		4	0.71	19	0.01	13	0.07	15	0.37	12	0.40	5	0.38
Bunin 1987		85	0.29	71	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	66	0.04	86	0.03
Bunin 1987b		86	0.27	55	0.00	85	0.03	83	0.03	63	0.05	63	0.04
Chiu 1999		53	0.55	29	0.01	48	0.08	46	0.08	58	0.04	49	0.06
Cohen 1997		76	0.43	62	0.00	74	0.04	77	0.04	36	0.21	43	0.09
Cortot 1951		67	0.50	74	0.00	76	0.03	86	0.03	78	0.03	87	0.03
Csalog 1996		81	0.38	72	0.00	75	0.04	74	0.04	45	0.05	69	0.04
Czerny 1949		49	0.56	83	0.00	59	0.06	54	0.06	56	0.05	55	0.05
Czerny 1990		7	0.70	2	0.07	2	0.18	3	0.51	40	0.12	20	0.25
Duchoud 2007		83	0.35	60	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	70	0.03	85	0.03
Ezaki 2006		19	0.64	51	0.00	42	0.06	39	0.17	65	0.04	44	0.08
Falvay 1989		6	0.70	9	0.02	8	0.10	7	0.43	7	0.54	2	0.48
Farrell 1958		3	0.72	1	0.32	1	0.32	1	0.65	10	0.50	1	0.57
Ferenczy 1958		75	0.43	64	0.00	79	0.04	78	0.04	79	0.03	83	0.03
Fliere 1977		20	0.63	3	0.07	6	0.08	21	0.30	62	0.04	35	0.11
Fou 1978		43	0.59	31	0.01	43	0.07	40	0.17	70	0.04	46	0.08
Francois 1956		10	0.68	43	0.00	9	0.09	10	0.40	23	0.32	9	0.36
Friedman 1923		54	0.55	79	0.00	54	0.05	57	0.05	61	0.05	59	0.05
Friedman 1923b		55	0.55	77	0.00	52	0.05	61	0.05	65	0.05	57	0.05
Friedman 1930		40	0.59	27	0.01	49	0.09	45	0.09	62	0.05	48	0.07
Garcia 2007		46	0.57	50	0.00	61	0.05	65	0.05	66	0.04	73	0.04
Garcia 2007b		56	0.55	46	0.00	62	0.04	73	0.04	68	0.04	78	0.04
Gierzod 1998		11	0.68	12	0.02	15	0.07	8	0.42	52	0.05	29	0.14
Gornostaeva 1994		12	0.67	34	0.00	16	0.06	9	0.42	22	0.23	16	0.31
Groot 1988		35	0.61	6	0.03	22	0.09	16	0.37	23	0.34	10	0.35
Harasiewicz 1955		68	0.49	56	0.00	72	0.04	76	0.04	83	0.03	88	0.03
Hatto 1993		69	0.49	28	0.01	69	0.06	53	0.06	65	0.04	58	0.05
Hatto 1997		63	0.51	84	0.00	70	0.05	60	0.05	68	0.04	71	0.04
Horowitz 1949		73	0.45	89	0.00	80	0.04	80	0.04	73	0.04	64	0.04
Indjic 1988		62	0.51	52	0.00	68	0.04	75	0.04	65	0.04	68	0.04
Kapell 1951		58	0.52	57	0.00	63	0.05	64	0.05	81	0.03	62	0.04
Kissin 1993		27	0.62	15	0.01	27	0.06	19	0.33	63	0.04	36	0.11
Kushner 1989		21	0.63	87	0.00	47	0.07	49	0.07	65	0.04	52	0.05
Luisada 1991		22	0.63	23	0.01	18	0.07	14	0.37	63	0.05	27	0.14
Lushtak 2004		24	0.62	42	0.00	25	0.07	23	0.28	43	0.10	25	0.17
Malcuzynski 1961		70	0.48	44	0.00	53	0.05	66	0.05	47	0.06	53	0.05
Magaloff 1978		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Magin 1975		66	0.50	58	0.00	64	0.06	51	0.06	84	0.03	61	0.04
Michalowski 1933		77	0.43	67	0.00	81	0.03	87	0.03	60	0.05	66	0.04
Milkina 1970		5	0.71	45	0.00	14	0.09	5	0.44	44	0.12	21	0.23
Mohovich 1999		13	0.66	78	0.00	23	0.06	25	0.27	50	0.07	30	0.14
Moravec 1969		41	0.59	38	0.00	40	0.05	43	0.16	17	0.46	18	0.27
Morozova 2008		65	0.50	80	0.00	65	0.05	55	0.05	52	0.05	54	0.05
Neighaus 1950		37	0.61	24	0.01	50	0.07	48	0.07	50	0.06	51	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		47	0.57	25	0.01	11	0.07	30	0.23	64	0.04	39	0.10
Ohlsson 1999		48	0.56	33	0.00	57	0.05	62	0.05	72	0.04	65	0.04
Osinska 1989		1	0.74	11	0.02	4	0.15	2	0.54	34	0.21	11	0.34
Pachmann 1927		51	0.55	65	0.00	67	0.04	72	0.04	38	0.13	47	0.07
Paderewski 1930		29	0.62	68	0.00	26	0.06	34	0.22	30	0.22	22	0.22
Perlemuter 1992		44	0.58	75	0.00	36	0.06	38	0.17	68	0.04	45	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		71	0.46	5	0.04	7	0.08	41	0.17	36	0.20	24	0.18
Poblocka 1999		78	0.43	73	0.00	78	0.04	68	0.04	86	0.02	79	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		8	0.69	13	0.02	17	0.06	13	0.39	28	0.23	17	0.30
Rachmaninoff 1923		2	0.73	7	0.03	3	0.11	4	0.50	21	0.31	4	0.39
Rangell 2001		82	0.37	39	0.00	55	0.05	63	0.05	74	0.03	77	0.04
Richter 1976		87	0.24	90	0.00	87	0.04	79	0.04	73	0.03	80	0.03
Rosen 1989		36	0.61	49	0.00	41	0.05	36	0.21	46	0.06	38	0.11
Rosenthal 1930		42	0.59	10	0.02	31	0.05	37	0.19	23	0.25	23	0.22
Rosenthal 1931		39	0.60	36	0.00	35	0.06	35	0.21	13	0.45	15	0.31
Rosenthal 1931b		30	0.62	22	0.01	34	0.05	31	0.23	13	0.48	13	0.33
Rosenthal 1931c		32	0.62	32	0.01	24	0.06	22	0.29	13	0.46	8	0.37
Rosenthal 1931d		34	0.61	61	0.00	33	0.06	28	0.24	13	0.48	12	0.34
Rossi 2007		28	0.62	4	0.07	5	0.09	20	0.33	12	0.44	6	0.38
Rubinstein 1939		17	0.66	26	0.01	19	0.08	11	0.39	16	0.36	7	0.37
Rubinstein 1952		45	0.58	14	0.01	10	0.08	6	0.43	26	0.38	3	0.40
Rubinstein 1966		16	0.66	53	0.00	29	0.06	29	0.24	30	0.29	19	0.26
Schilhawsky 1960		72	0.45	76	0.00	73	0.03	81	0.03	74	0.04	82	0.03
Shebanova 2002		18	0.65	21	0.01	30	0.05	18	0.33	55	0.05	32	0.13
Smith 1975		14	0.66	8	0.03	12	0.07	12	0.39	20	0.27	14	0.32
Sokolov 2002		52	0.55	40	0.00	32	0.05	44	0.16	41	0.12	28	0.14
Sztompka 1959		25	0.62	69	0.00	45	0.08	47	0.08	56	0.05	50	0.06
Tomsic 1995		57	0.54	54	0.00	46	0.06	52	0.06	20	0.43	26	0.16
Uninsky 1932		74	0.44	30	0.01	77	0.04	71	0.04	84	0.03	84	0.03
Uninsky 1971		84	0.34	70	0.00	83	0.04	70	0.04	62	0.05	67	0.04
Wasowski 1980		50	0.55	66	0.00	58	0.05	56	0.05	80	0.04	60	0.04
Zak 1937		23	0.63	35	0.00	39	0.06	27	0.24	70	0.04	40	0.10
Zak 1951		38	0.61	18	0.01	38	0.05	26	0.25	69	0.04	41	0.10
Random 1		89	-0.23	86	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	63	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		88	-0.08	47	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	39	0.10	72	0.04
Random 3		90	-0.25	88	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	74	0.03	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).