Schilhawsky 1960

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		4	0.83	30	0.01	5	0.17	5	0.59	10	0.46	10	0.52
Anderszewski 2003		45	0.64	26	0.01	51	0.04	63	0.04	53	0.05	68	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		51	0.58	42	0.00	37	0.08	37	0.29	39	0.14	41	0.20
Bacha 2000		79	0.38	66	0.00	71	0.04	75	0.04	65	0.04	63	0.04
Badura 1965		28	0.70	19	0.01	26	0.09	33	0.36	20	0.47	27	0.41
Barbosa 1983		80	0.38	87	0.00	74	0.04	69	0.04	49	0.06	58	0.05
Biret 1990		67	0.49	25	0.01	60	0.05	58	0.05	81	0.03	74	0.04
Blet 2003		32	0.69	76	0.00	46	0.06	50	0.06	29	0.24	46	0.12
Block 1995		58	0.53	89	0.00	49	0.05	53	0.05	61	0.04	70	0.04
Blumental 1952		66	0.50	31	0.01	55	0.05	59	0.05	79	0.03	71	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		13	0.75	17	0.01	20	0.08	14	0.48	17	0.49	14	0.48
Brailowsky 1960		72	0.45	77	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	81	0.03	77	0.03
Bunin 1987		43	0.64	28	0.01	13	0.10	32	0.37	2	0.58	21	0.46
Bunin 1987b		44	0.64	6	0.04	12	0.09	31	0.38	2	0.58	17	0.47
Chiu 1999		70	0.47	29	0.01	56	0.06	52	0.06	81	0.03	65	0.04
Cohen 1997		87	0.21	64	0.00	85	0.02	85	0.02	75	0.03	89	0.02
Cortot 1951		21	0.73	24	0.01	27	0.13	19	0.47	3	0.56	11	0.51
Csalog 1996		77	0.41	65	0.00	67	0.04	73	0.04	80	0.03	83	0.03
Czerny 1949		1	0.86	1	0.30	1	0.29	1	0.65	1	0.66	1	0.65
Czerny 1990		27	0.70	40	0.00	45	0.05	55	0.05	84	0.03	73	0.04
Duchoud 2007		62	0.50	23	0.01	42	0.08	43	0.17	26	0.23	39	0.20
Ezaki 2006		41	0.66	72	0.00	48	0.08	46	0.08	54	0.04	53	0.06
Falvay 1989		86	0.22	83	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	76	0.03	87	0.02
Farrell 1958		65	0.50	54	0.00	64	0.04	71	0.04	78	0.04	67	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		47	0.61	50	0.00	50	0.05	56	0.05	35	0.11	51	0.07
Fliere 1977		2	0.85	8	0.03	3	0.16	2	0.63	6	0.47	7	0.54
Fou 1978		54	0.57	74	0.00	57	0.07	49	0.07	49	0.05	55	0.06
Francois 1956		59	0.52	13	0.01	70	0.04	67	0.04	81	0.03	86	0.03
Friedman 1923		26	0.71	52	0.00	33	0.07	28	0.44	12	0.52	16	0.48
Friedman 1923b		24	0.71	59	0.00	32	0.08	25	0.44	12	0.52	15	0.48
Friedman 1930		35	0.68	41	0.00	40	0.09	39	0.22	18	0.46	35	0.32
Garcia 2007		29	0.70	46	0.00	39	0.13	34	0.36	14	0.45	28	0.40
Garcia 2007b		46	0.63	48	0.00	38	0.10	35	0.36	18	0.42	30	0.39
Gierzod 1998		8	0.79	21	0.01	11	0.12	13	0.51	20	0.40	23	0.45
Gornostaeva 1994		68	0.49	37	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	77	0.03	84	0.03
Groot 1988		69	0.48	62	0.00	65	0.05	61	0.05	58	0.05	62	0.05
Harasiewicz 1955		12	0.76	43	0.00	18	0.08	11	0.54	18	0.37	24	0.45
Hatto 1993		19	0.74	51	0.00	17	0.10	22	0.46	12	0.47	22	0.46
Hatto 1997		17	0.75	56	0.00	15	0.09	21	0.47	12	0.46	20	0.46
Horowitz 1949		11	0.76	60	0.00	14	0.11	12	0.53	1	0.62	4	0.57
Indjic 1988		16	0.75	69	0.00	16	0.08	18	0.47	12	0.46	19	0.46
Kapell 1951		30	0.70	27	0.01	24	0.10	27	0.44	21	0.21	37	0.30
Kissin 1993		7	0.80	5	0.04	7	0.21	6	0.58	13	0.48	8	0.53
Kushner 1989		40	0.66	57	0.00	52	0.05	57	0.05	60	0.05	56	0.05
Luisada 1991		39	0.66	88	0.00	47	0.09	45	0.09	56	0.05	50	0.07
Lushtak 2004		42	0.65	16	0.01	28	0.10	38	0.24	35	0.17	40	0.20
Malcuzynski 1961		52	0.57	22	0.01	31	0.09	42	0.17	14	0.33	38	0.24
Magaloff 1978		71	0.45	78	0.00	75	0.04	74	0.04	81	0.03	79	0.03
Magin 1975		34	0.68	18	0.01	34	0.06	29	0.42	31	0.22	36	0.30
Michalowski 1933		33	0.69	10	0.02	19	0.08	20	0.47	7	0.54	12	0.50
Milkina 1970		50	0.58	70	0.00	63	0.07	48	0.07	63	0.04	57	0.05
Mohovich 1999		60	0.51	85	0.00	59	0.04	64	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.04
Moravec 1969		76	0.41	33	0.00	83	0.04	62	0.04	66	0.04	64	0.04
Morozova 2008		23	0.72	53	0.00	35	0.07	36	0.33	19	0.36	34	0.34
Neighaus 1950		22	0.73	11	0.02	9	0.11	10	0.56	12	0.50	9	0.53
Niedzielski 1931		14	0.75	32	0.00	29	0.08	16	0.47	9	0.50	13	0.48
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.67	34	0.00	25	0.10	23	0.45	14	0.40	26	0.42
Osinska 1989		38	0.67	20	0.01	44	0.07	44	0.14	37	0.19	44	0.16
Pachmann 1927		48	0.59	90	0.00	54	0.05	60	0.05	27	0.25	47	0.11
Paderewski 1930		56	0.54	61	0.00	58	0.04	65	0.04	78	0.03	82	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		31	0.70	44	0.00	36	0.09	30	0.38	16	0.34	31	0.36
Pierdomenico 2008		82	0.35	58	0.00	82	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.04	81	0.03
Poblocka 1999		3	0.84	4	0.06	2	0.14	3	0.60	6	0.55	3	0.57
Rabcewiczowa 1932		53	0.57	45	0.00	61	0.08	47	0.08	52	0.05	54	0.06
Rachmaninoff 1923		25	0.71	7	0.03	30	0.08	15	0.48	9	0.40	25	0.44
Rangell 2001		85	0.23	79	0.00	76	0.04	76	0.04	67	0.03	85	0.03
Richter 1976		5	0.81	2	0.12	6	0.21	8	0.57	2	0.67	2	0.62
Rosen 1989		55	0.56	71	0.00	62	0.05	54	0.05	57	0.05	60	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		49	0.59	36	0.00	53	0.06	51	0.06	16	0.31	45	0.14
Rosenthal 1931		75	0.41	73	0.00	79	0.02	84	0.02	44	0.11	59	0.05
Rosenthal 1931b		74	0.41	49	0.00	78	0.02	86	0.02	43	0.09	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		73	0.44	75	0.00	77	0.04	72	0.04	44	0.11	52	0.07
Rosenthal 1931d		78	0.39	38	0.00	81	0.03	80	0.03	42	0.10	61	0.05
Rossi 2007		84	0.30	67	0.00	84	0.03	82	0.03	84	0.03	78	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		64	0.50	55	0.00	68	0.03	79	0.03	54	0.05	66	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		81	0.35	63	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	51	0.06	76	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		61	0.51	80	0.00	69	0.04	66	0.04	53	0.05	69	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Shebanova 2002		10	0.77	15	0.01	10	0.16	7	0.58	16	0.38	18	0.47
Smith 1975		63	0.50	39	0.00	72	0.04	70	0.04	77	0.03	80	0.03
Sokolov 2002		57	0.54	12	0.01	41	0.08	40	0.18	34	0.18	42	0.18
Sztompka 1959		20	0.73	47	0.00	23	0.09	17	0.47	25	0.32	29	0.39
Tomsic 1995		83	0.31	86	0.00	86	0.02	83	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.02
Uninsky 1932		9	0.78	9	0.02	8	0.25	9	0.56	3	0.56	6	0.56
Uninsky 1971		6	0.80	3	0.08	4	0.14	4	0.59	2	0.53	5	0.56
Wasowski 1980		36	0.67	14	0.01	43	0.08	41	0.17	29	0.18	43	0.17
Zak 1937		15	0.75	84	0.00	21	0.09	24	0.44	21	0.26	32	0.34
Zak 1951		18	0.74	35	0.00	22	0.09	26	0.44	23	0.26	33	0.34
Random 1		89	-0.06	81	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	11	0.43	49	0.09
Random 2		88	-0.02	68	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	10	0.42	48	0.09
Random 3		90	-0.29	82	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	85	0.02	90	0.01

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).