Rabcewiczowa 1932

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		12	0.70	16	0.01	19	0.06	18	0.30	53	0.05	41	0.12
Anderszewski 2003		58	0.56	35	0.00	72	0.04	68	0.04	58	0.04	67	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		57	0.57	25	0.00	53	0.04	65	0.04	63	0.04	72	0.04
Bacha 2000		44	0.62	86	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.11	34	0.13	36	0.12
Badura 1965		76	0.48	83	0.00	78	0.03	82	0.03	75	0.04	86	0.03
Barbosa 1983		79	0.44	53	0.00	42	0.04	42	0.09	27	0.21	33	0.14
Biret 1990		4	0.75	30	0.00	8	0.12	10	0.39	13	0.42	11	0.40
Blet 2003		23	0.66	34	0.00	35	0.06	27	0.23	23	0.29	21	0.26
Block 1995		82	0.42	45	0.00	81	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04	71	0.04
Blumental 1952		2	0.77	2	0.17	2	0.25	5	0.48	4	0.41	6	0.44
Boshniakovich 1969		74	0.50	64	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	77	0.03	87	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		37	0.63	68	0.00	55	0.04	58	0.04	37	0.17	46	0.08
Bunin 1987		85	0.34	47	0.00	86	0.04	75	0.04	64	0.05	73	0.04
Bunin 1987b		86	0.33	40	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	62	0.05	64	0.04
Chiu 1999		46	0.61	69	0.00	37	0.05	34	0.14	20	0.27	26	0.19
Cohen 1997		71	0.51	87	0.00	52	0.05	54	0.05	11	0.39	34	0.14
Cortot 1951		59	0.55	84	0.00	73	0.03	81	0.03	45	0.06	78	0.04
Csalog 1996		34	0.63	23	0.00	33	0.05	30	0.21	6	0.46	17	0.31
Czerny 1949		60	0.54	42	0.00	64	0.04	73	0.04	59	0.05	70	0.04
Czerny 1990		3	0.75	1	0.18	1	0.18	4	0.48	9	0.45	4	0.46
Duchoud 2007		84	0.39	51	0.00	82	0.04	71	0.04	75	0.03	85	0.03
Ezaki 2006		47	0.61	48	0.00	50	0.07	45	0.07	62	0.04	56	0.05
Falvay 1989		19	0.68	41	0.00	31	0.06	24	0.26	18	0.47	15	0.35
Farrell 1958		38	0.63	46	0.00	20	0.07	11	0.34	29	0.30	16	0.32
Ferenczy 1958		52	0.58	55	0.00	57	0.04	63	0.04	64	0.04	69	0.04
Fliere 1977		29	0.65	75	0.00	44	0.04	43	0.09	72	0.04	53	0.06
Fou 1978		5	0.74	17	0.01	6	0.11	3	0.49	9	0.46	2	0.47
Francois 1956		9	0.72	26	0.00	9	0.13	8	0.41	6	0.53	3	0.47
Friedman 1923		75	0.49	62	0.00	77	0.03	87	0.03	59	0.05	80	0.04
Friedman 1923b		77	0.48	82	0.00	76	0.03	83	0.03	62	0.05	74	0.04
Friedman 1930		66	0.53	56	0.00	75	0.04	69	0.04	50	0.07	60	0.05
Garcia 2007		21	0.67	50	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.13	34	0.20	30	0.16
Garcia 2007b		27	0.65	60	0.00	39	0.08	32	0.17	64	0.04	48	0.08
Gierzod 1998		40	0.62	43	0.00	40	0.04	41	0.10	61	0.05	52	0.07
Gornostaeva 1994		51	0.58	31	0.00	59	0.04	57	0.04	50	0.05	75	0.04
Groot 1988		62	0.54	61	0.00	61	0.04	64	0.04	65	0.05	76	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		61	0.54	52	0.00	66	0.04	77	0.04	63	0.05	79	0.04
Hatto 1993		73	0.50	78	0.00	69	0.05	53	0.05	79	0.03	77	0.04
Hatto 1997		69	0.52	79	0.00	68	0.04	59	0.04	79	0.04	68	0.04
Horowitz 1949		78	0.45	8	0.04	84	0.04	76	0.04	66	0.05	66	0.04
Indjic 1988		68	0.52	70	0.00	67	0.04	70	0.04	51	0.06	59	0.05
Kapell 1951		8	0.73	12	0.02	7	0.10	2	0.49	25	0.17	19	0.29
Kissin 1993		16	0.69	18	0.01	16	0.07	25	0.24	50	0.04	43	0.10
Kushner 1989		1	0.77	6	0.06	3	0.18	1	0.59	5	0.55	1	0.57
Luisada 1991		32	0.64	80	0.00	29	0.06	23	0.26	51	0.06	37	0.12
Lushtak 2004		24	0.66	57	0.00	14	0.09	13	0.32	22	0.25	20	0.28
Malcuzynski 1961		83	0.39	38	0.00	83	0.03	86	0.03	82	0.03	82	0.03
Magaloff 1978		15	0.69	72	0.00	32	0.06	28	0.23	13	0.39	18	0.30
Magin 1975		53	0.58	20	0.01	25	0.06	38	0.12	40	0.11	42	0.11
Michalowski 1933		45	0.62	4	0.06	15	0.08	36	0.14	33	0.20	29	0.17
Milkina 1970		11	0.72	63	0.00	30	0.05	26	0.23	43	0.14	28	0.18
Mohovich 1999		18	0.68	81	0.00	36	0.06	31	0.20	67	0.05	44	0.10
Moravec 1969		14	0.69	24	0.00	26	0.07	15	0.31	11	0.50	13	0.39
Morozova 2008		31	0.64	29	0.00	34	0.05	29	0.21	37	0.17	27	0.19
Neighaus 1950		64	0.53	76	0.00	74	0.04	61	0.04	46	0.07	61	0.05
Niedzielski 1931		50	0.60	65	0.00	45	0.04	56	0.04	40	0.14	51	0.07
Ohlsson 1999		65	0.53	22	0.00	63	0.03	80	0.03	86	0.03	84	0.03
Osinska 1989		25	0.66	58	0.00	43	0.04	44	0.08	76	0.04	54	0.06
Pachmann 1927		41	0.62	28	0.00	54	0.04	60	0.04	9	0.43	35	0.13
Paderewski 1930		7	0.73	21	0.01	13	0.12	19	0.30	5	0.50	14	0.39
Perlemuter 1992		6	0.73	13	0.02	5	0.10	6	0.43	14	0.38	9	0.40
Pierdomenico 2008		80	0.43	54	0.00	71	0.04	67	0.04	41	0.14	50	0.07
Poblocka 1999		54	0.57	39	0.00	51	0.05	50	0.05	56	0.05	57	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rachmaninoff 1923		22	0.67	10	0.03	21	0.06	20	0.29	28	0.21	22	0.25
Rangell 2001		81	0.42	59	0.00	79	0.03	85	0.03	62	0.03	88	0.03
Richter 1976		87	0.30	19	0.01	87	0.04	74	0.04	76	0.03	83	0.03
Rosen 1989		20	0.67	88	0.00	28	0.05	17	0.31	37	0.14	25	0.21
Rosenthal 1930		42	0.62	15	0.02	27	0.06	35	0.14	14	0.33	24	0.21
Rosenthal 1931		28	0.65	27	0.00	24	0.09	21	0.28	7	0.56	10	0.40
Rosenthal 1931b		26	0.65	33	0.00	22	0.08	14	0.32	7	0.58	7	0.43
Rosenthal 1931c		33	0.64	9	0.04	23	0.08	16	0.31	5	0.54	8	0.41
Rosenthal 1931d		39	0.63	5	0.06	18	0.06	22	0.28	6	0.57	12	0.40
Rossi 2007		63	0.54	49	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	38	0.15	49	0.07
Rubinstein 1939		49	0.61	66	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	20	0.31	32	0.14
Rubinstein 1952		17	0.68	14	0.02	4	0.12	9	0.40	10	0.50	5	0.45
Rubinstein 1966		43	0.62	89	0.00	46	0.05	55	0.05	29	0.30	39	0.12
Schilhawsky 1960		55	0.57	36	0.00	56	0.05	52	0.05	47	0.08	55	0.06
Shebanova 2002		13	0.69	37	0.00	12	0.09	12	0.34	63	0.04	40	0.12
Smith 1975		56	0.57	90	0.00	60	0.05	51	0.05	56	0.04	62	0.04
Sokolov 2002		70	0.52	73	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	61	0.03	81	0.03
Sztompka 1959		10	0.72	7	0.05	10	0.13	7	0.42	40	0.15	23	0.25
Tomsic 1995		72	0.50	44	0.00	62	0.04	66	0.04	27	0.36	38	0.12
Uninsky 1932		30	0.64	11	0.03	17	0.07	39	0.12	50	0.07	45	0.09
Uninsky 1971		67	0.53	32	0.00	58	0.06	46	0.06	63	0.05	58	0.05
Wasowski 1980		36	0.63	3	0.07	11	0.09	33	0.16	35	0.14	31	0.15
Zak 1937		35	0.63	85	0.00	48	0.06	48	0.06	73	0.03	63	0.04
Zak 1951		48	0.61	77	0.00	49	0.05	49	0.05	64	0.04	65	0.04
Random 1		90	-0.27	71	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	47	0.05	89	0.02
Random 2		88	0.00	67	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	19	0.29	47	0.08
Random 3		89	-0.23	74	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	61	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).