Rangell 2001

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

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).