Moravec 1969

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	0.52	67	0.00	45	0.07	46	0.07	82	0.03	46	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		55	0.43	45	0.00	64	0.05	58	0.05	77	0.03	56	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		68	0.39	36	0.00	65	0.04	63	0.04	87	0.02	80	0.03
Bacha 2000		26	0.55	39	0.00	19	0.14	13	0.49	57	0.04	21	0.14
Badura 1965		83	0.30	8	0.03	76	0.03	77	0.03	78	0.03	79	0.03
Barbosa 1983		60	0.42	68	0.00	31	0.08	35	0.19	65	0.04	34	0.09
Biret 1990		13	0.60	31	0.00	15	0.11	18	0.46	54	0.05	20	0.15
Blet 2003		43	0.49	46	0.00	51	0.05	53	0.05	71	0.04	57	0.04
Block 1995		80	0.31	87	0.00	78	0.02	84	0.02	82	0.03	87	0.02
Blumental 1952		2	0.71	1	0.20	1	0.20	3	0.63	2	0.42	7	0.51
Boshniakovich 1969		81	0.31	73	0.00	80	0.02	82	0.02	83	0.03	88	0.02
Brailowsky 1960		31	0.53	30	0.00	29	0.07	26	0.34	57	0.04	26	0.12
Bunin 1987		85	0.20	26	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	77	0.03	89	0.02
Bunin 1987b		86	0.18	22	0.01	86	0.03	79	0.03	77	0.03	70	0.03
Chiu 1999		45	0.48	49	0.00	30	0.07	30	0.25	73	0.03	33	0.09
Cohen 1997		67	0.40	38	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.13	14	0.35	17	0.21
Cortot 1951		20	0.58	59	0.00	28	0.07	29	0.28	43	0.09	19	0.16
Csalog 1996		15	0.60	15	0.01	16	0.13	14	0.48	11	0.39	11	0.43
Czerny 1949		42	0.49	20	0.01	50	0.05	57	0.05	74	0.04	60	0.04
Czerny 1990		1	0.71	4	0.08	2	0.18	2	0.66	19	0.31	10	0.45
Duchoud 2007		74	0.34	58	0.00	74	0.04	75	0.04	76	0.03	78	0.03
Ezaki 2006		16	0.60	12	0.02	11	0.15	10	0.53	41	0.12	15	0.25
Falvay 1989		9	0.64	14	0.01	12	0.10	16	0.47	11	0.52	9	0.49
Farrell 1958		29	0.54	64	0.00	21	0.12	22	0.40	62	0.05	23	0.14
Ferenczy 1958		41	0.50	56	0.00	40	0.05	44	0.12	53	0.05	37	0.08
Fliere 1977		49	0.44	28	0.00	61	0.04	61	0.04	80	0.03	64	0.03
Fou 1978		33	0.52	42	0.00	43	0.05	40	0.14	86	0.03	43	0.06
Francois 1956		22	0.56	76	0.00	23	0.13	23	0.40	66	0.04	25	0.13
Friedman 1923		69	0.39	65	0.00	73	0.06	47	0.06	70	0.04	50	0.05
Friedman 1923b		71	0.38	52	0.00	71	0.04	64	0.04	86	0.03	81	0.03
Friedman 1930		58	0.42	44	0.00	72	0.05	56	0.05	59	0.05	45	0.05
Garcia 2007		24	0.55	32	0.00	44	0.08	37	0.15	65	0.04	38	0.08
Garcia 2007b		40	0.50	23	0.00	41	0.05	43	0.13	69	0.04	42	0.07
Gierzod 1998		44	0.48	60	0.00	52	0.07	45	0.07	74	0.03	47	0.05
Gornostaeva 1994		38	0.51	51	0.00	37	0.05	38	0.15	70	0.03	41	0.07
Groot 1988		59	0.42	41	0.00	55	0.05	50	0.05	83	0.03	62	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		52	0.44	47	0.00	57	0.04	76	0.04	78	0.03	84	0.03
Hatto 1993		82	0.30	90	0.00	82	0.03	80	0.03	85	0.03	83	0.03
Hatto 1997		76	0.32	83	0.00	81	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.03	86	0.02
Horowitz 1949		75	0.33	63	0.00	84	0.04	72	0.04	83	0.03	71	0.03
Indjic 1988		77	0.32	77	0.00	83	0.04	74	0.04	85	0.03	75	0.03
Kapell 1951		18	0.58	13	0.02	17	0.10	20	0.42	80	0.03	28	0.11
Kissin 1993		30	0.53	48	0.00	38	0.05	39	0.14	86	0.02	44	0.05
Kushner 1989		39	0.51	61	0.00	47	0.04	62	0.04	86	0.02	68	0.03
Luisada 1991		51	0.44	81	0.00	46	0.04	69	0.04	78	0.03	63	0.03
Lushtak 2004		53	0.44	88	0.00	53	0.05	49	0.05	79	0.03	61	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		36	0.51	11	0.03	24	0.08	27	0.29	38	0.15	16	0.21
Magaloff 1978		17	0.59	17	0.01	20	0.10	17	0.46	43	0.16	14	0.27
Magin 1975		48	0.46	18	0.01	49	0.04	60	0.04	80	0.03	67	0.03
Michalowski 1933		61	0.41	21	0.01	67	0.05	59	0.05	71	0.04	54	0.04
Milkina 1970		12	0.62	53	0.00	18	0.10	15	0.48	75	0.03	27	0.12
Mohovich 1999		27	0.54	54	0.00	26	0.07	24	0.40	85	0.03	29	0.11
Moravec 1969		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Morozova 2008		70	0.38	78	0.00	59	0.03	78	0.03	65	0.04	76	0.03
Neighaus 1950		79	0.32	66	0.00	77	0.02	87	0.02	84	0.03	90	0.02
Niedzielski 1931		7	0.66	5	0.07	9	0.26	1	0.68	26	0.37	8	0.50
Ohlsson 1999		84	0.28	79	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	77	0.03	74	0.03
Osinska 1989		19	0.58	33	0.00	27	0.06	25	0.34	86	0.03	31	0.10
Pachmann 1927		63	0.41	50	0.00	75	0.04	70	0.04	83	0.02	72	0.03
Paderewski 1930		37	0.51	84	0.00	35	0.06	31	0.24	69	0.03	36	0.08
Perlemuter 1992		32	0.52	72	0.00	36	0.05	36	0.19	84	0.03	35	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		78	0.32	62	0.00	69	0.05	54	0.05	75	0.04	51	0.04
Poblocka 1999		56	0.43	69	0.00	68	0.04	67	0.04	87	0.02	65	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		3	0.69	24	0.00	8	0.21	11	0.50	15	0.31	12	0.39
Rachmaninoff 1923		14	0.60	16	0.01	14	0.11	12	0.49	57	0.04	22	0.14
Rangell 2001		73	0.35	40	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	73	0.03	82	0.03
Richter 1976		87	0.14	57	0.00	87	0.02	85	0.02	84	0.02	85	0.02
Rosen 1989		35	0.52	70	0.00	39	0.05	33	0.23	86	0.02	40	0.07
Rosenthal 1930		11	0.63	9	0.03	10	0.17	5	0.56	6	0.50	6	0.53
Rosenthal 1931		5	0.67	2	0.15	3	0.25	4	0.56	5	0.59	1	0.57
Rosenthal 1931b		6	0.67	7	0.04	4	0.18	7	0.55	6	0.59	3	0.57
Rosenthal 1931c		8	0.66	10	0.03	7	0.29	9	0.54	6	0.54	5	0.54
Rosenthal 1931d		4	0.67	27	0.00	6	0.17	8	0.55	5	0.59	2	0.57
Rossi 2007		10	0.64	3	0.08	5	0.16	6	0.56	5	0.55	4	0.55
Rubinstein 1939		47	0.47	85	0.00	34	0.08	34	0.20	56	0.05	32	0.10
Rubinstein 1952		25	0.55	55	0.00	13	0.10	21	0.41	32	0.34	13	0.37
Rubinstein 1966		57	0.42	80	0.00	33	0.05	41	0.13	78	0.04	39	0.07
Schilhawsky 1960		64	0.41	34	0.00	56	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04	58	0.04
Shebanova 2002		50	0.44	29	0.00	54	0.06	48	0.06	84	0.03	59	0.04
Smith 1975		23	0.55	25	0.00	22	0.11	19	0.44	53	0.04	24	0.13
Sokolov 2002		72	0.36	43	0.00	62	0.04	71	0.04	62	0.03	66	0.03
Sztompka 1959		46	0.48	74	0.00	48	0.05	55	0.05	87	0.02	73	0.03
Tomsic 1995		66	0.40	71	0.00	63	0.04	65	0.04	72	0.04	53	0.04
Uninsky 1932		21	0.56	6	0.05	25	0.08	28	0.28	44	0.13	18	0.19
Uninsky 1971		65	0.41	35	0.00	70	0.05	51	0.05	78	0.04	55	0.04
Wasowski 1980		28	0.54	37	0.00	32	0.05	32	0.24	76	0.04	30	0.10
Zak 1937		54	0.43	89	0.00	58	0.04	73	0.04	86	0.02	69	0.03
Zak 1951		62	0.41	86	0.00	60	0.05	52	0.05	86	0.03	52	0.04
Random 1		89	-0.14	75	0.00	88	0.01	88	0.01	27	0.22	48	0.05
Random 2		90	-0.21	19	0.01	90	0.01	90	0.01	41	0.08	77	0.03
Random 3		88	-0.11	82	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	33	0.22	49	0.05

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).