Shebanova 2002

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	0.85	3	0.14	4	0.24	3	0.63	3	0.57	5	0.60
Anderszewski 2003		40	0.69	68	0.00	57	0.04	64	0.04	39	0.19	75	0.09
Ashkenazy 1981		52	0.67	55	0.00	38	0.08	35	0.23	11	0.43	35	0.31
Bacha 2000		65	0.60	72	0.00	61	0.05	49	0.05	21	0.26	66	0.11
Badura 1965		58	0.66	86	0.00	56	0.04	61	0.04	19	0.48	50	0.14
Barbosa 1983		84	0.48	22	0.01	68	0.03	76	0.03	23	0.22	76	0.08
Biret 1990		47	0.69	59	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.08	19	0.34	46	0.16
Blet 2003		37	0.70	54	0.00	53	0.03	75	0.03	17	0.37	69	0.11
Block 1995		63	0.63	73	0.00	47	0.04	62	0.04	4	0.43	58	0.13
Blumental 1952		70	0.58	18	0.01	52	0.04	65	0.04	37	0.12	77	0.07
Boshniakovich 1969		18	0.76	24	0.00	14	0.08	24	0.35	16	0.51	21	0.42
Brailowsky 1960		59	0.65	66	0.00	70	0.04	70	0.04	21	0.31	67	0.11
Bunin 1987		73	0.56	57	0.00	67	0.03	81	0.03	21	0.41	71	0.11
Bunin 1987b		75	0.55	75	0.00	66	0.03	79	0.03	21	0.41	68	0.11
Chiu 1999		66	0.59	12	0.01	43	0.05	43	0.10	12	0.34	43	0.18
Cohen 1997		87	0.33	83	0.00	87	0.04	72	0.04	60	0.04	84	0.04
Cortot 1951		41	0.69	61	0.00	59	0.04	57	0.04	16	0.43	60	0.13
Csalog 1996		78	0.53	31	0.00	64	0.04	68	0.04	17	0.34	63	0.12
Czerny 1949		14	0.77	33	0.00	18	0.09	12	0.41	13	0.52	13	0.46
Czerny 1990		17	0.76	34	0.00	31	0.05	34	0.24	15	0.37	37	0.30
Duchoud 2007		64	0.62	46	0.00	49	0.04	74	0.04	8	0.43	57	0.13
Ezaki 2006		44	0.69	39	0.00	54	0.03	80	0.03	28	0.25	73	0.09
Falvay 1989		81	0.51	29	0.00	84	0.03	78	0.03	47	0.10	78	0.05
Farrell 1958		53	0.67	5	0.08	12	0.10	39	0.18	19	0.42	39	0.27
Ferenczy 1958		56	0.67	53	0.00	62	0.05	50	0.05	9	0.44	48	0.15
Fliere 1977		5	0.84	8	0.03	6	0.25	6	0.55	2	0.54	6	0.54
Fou 1978		50	0.68	62	0.00	40	0.05	42	0.15	15	0.36	42	0.23
Francois 1956		28	0.73	20	0.01	42	0.08	40	0.17	2	0.57	36	0.31
Friedman 1923		39	0.69	71	0.00	50	0.03	77	0.03	21	0.44	72	0.11
Friedman 1923b		45	0.69	80	0.00	48	0.04	71	0.04	21	0.45	59	0.13
Friedman 1930		43	0.69	76	0.00	60	0.06	47	0.06	25	0.41	45	0.16
Garcia 2007		31	0.73	47	0.00	37	0.06	33	0.25	10	0.52	29	0.36
Garcia 2007b		21	0.76	63	0.00	17	0.09	23	0.35	3	0.61	14	0.46
Gierzod 1998		1	0.88	2	0.18	2	0.22	1	0.67	1	0.69	1	0.68
Gornostaeva 1994		32	0.72	40	0.00	45	0.04	60	0.04	5	0.49	51	0.14
Groot 1988		55	0.67	32	0.00	46	0.04	67	0.04	7	0.50	52	0.14
Harasiewicz 1955		34	0.72	17	0.01	29	0.05	31	0.27	20	0.33	38	0.30
Hatto 1993		54	0.67	10	0.02	36	0.09	30	0.28	13	0.47	30	0.36
Hatto 1997		48	0.68	43	0.00	35	0.07	29	0.28	13	0.45	31	0.35
Horowitz 1949		51	0.67	69	0.00	58	0.05	51	0.05	17	0.47	47	0.15
Indjic 1988		46	0.69	52	0.00	34	0.05	28	0.29	13	0.45	28	0.36
Kapell 1951		20	0.76	9	0.02	10	0.16	9	0.46	5	0.42	17	0.44
Kissin 1993		8	0.81	14	0.01	7	0.13	8	0.48	3	0.61	8	0.54
Kushner 1989		7	0.83	6	0.06	9	0.16	10	0.45	1	0.62	10	0.53
Luisada 1991		30	0.73	41	0.00	19	0.09	19	0.37	10	0.41	27	0.39
Lushtak 2004		35	0.71	19	0.01	33	0.05	32	0.25	5	0.43	32	0.33
Malcuzynski 1961		71	0.58	56	0.00	77	0.04	73	0.04	49	0.05	82	0.04
Magaloff 1978		60	0.65	11	0.01	71	0.05	55	0.05	18	0.33	53	0.13
Magin 1975		27	0.74	70	0.00	16	0.08	18	0.37	7	0.52	16	0.44
Michalowski 1933		23	0.75	84	0.00	30	0.06	27	0.30	10	0.53	25	0.40
Milkina 1970		22	0.75	48	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.16	15	0.41	41	0.26
Mohovich 1999		9	0.79	13	0.01	13	0.08	11	0.41	3	0.72	9	0.54
Moravec 1969		85	0.44	30	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	48	0.06	80	0.04
Morozova 2008		29	0.73	16	0.01	26	0.11	26	0.32	6	0.51	26	0.40
Neighaus 1950		2	0.87	4	0.10	3	0.28	2	0.65	1	0.69	2	0.67
Niedzielski 1931		33	0.72	49	0.00	39	0.05	37	0.20	14	0.48	34	0.31
Ohlsson 1999		6	0.83	7	0.03	5	0.28	5	0.60	1	0.69	3	0.64
Osinska 1989		13	0.78	15	0.01	20	0.08	21	0.36	8	0.55	15	0.44
Pachmann 1927		61	0.64	58	0.00	76	0.05	53	0.05	21	0.32	56	0.13
Paderewski 1930		57	0.66	87	0.00	63	0.06	45	0.06	20	0.34	49	0.14
Perlemuter 1992		16	0.76	35	0.00	11	0.10	14	0.39	1	0.64	11	0.50
Pierdomenico 2008		72	0.57	25	0.00	74	0.06	46	0.06	6	0.46	44	0.17
Poblocka 1999		10	0.79	27	0.00	8	0.14	7	0.48	2	0.60	7	0.54
Rabcewiczowa 1932		42	0.69	64	0.00	51	0.04	63	0.04	12	0.34	62	0.12
Rachmaninoff 1923		49	0.68	28	0.00	27	0.07	38	0.19	14	0.36	40	0.26
Rangell 2001		77	0.53	23	0.00	65	0.04	58	0.04	17	0.37	64	0.12
Richter 1976		69	0.58	60	0.00	75	0.04	56	0.04	27	0.40	55	0.13
Rosen 1989		11	0.78	50	0.00	21	0.09	20	0.36	8	0.51	20	0.43
Rosenthal 1930		74	0.56	85	0.00	79	0.06	48	0.06	51	0.04	79	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.52	78	0.00	81	0.03	87	0.03	50	0.05	83	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		79	0.52	81	0.00	80	0.03	86	0.03	54	0.05	85	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		82	0.51	74	0.00	82	0.03	85	0.03	46	0.05	86	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		83	0.50	88	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	64	0.04	87	0.03
Rossi 2007		86	0.42	82	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	63	0.05	81	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		67	0.59	37	0.00	73	0.05	54	0.05	35	0.17	74	0.09
Rubinstein 1952		76	0.54	21	0.01	72	0.04	59	0.04	27	0.37	65	0.12
Rubinstein 1966		62	0.64	36	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	27	0.33	70	0.11
Schilhawsky 1960		15	0.77	38	0.00	15	0.07	16	0.38	7	0.58	12	0.47
Shebanova 2002		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Smith 1975		36	0.71	77	0.00	55	0.04	66	0.04	16	0.36	61	0.12
Sokolov 2002		38	0.69	45	0.00	32	0.06	36	0.23	6	0.45	33	0.32
Sztompka 1959		3	0.86	1	0.18	1	0.18	4	0.60	1	0.62	4	0.61
Tomsic 1995		68	0.59	26	0.00	78	0.05	52	0.05	29	0.34	54	0.13
Uninsky 1932		24	0.74	65	0.00	24	0.09	22	0.36	15	0.46	24	0.41
Uninsky 1971		25	0.74	44	0.00	25	0.14	13	0.39	15	0.44	23	0.41
Wasowski 1980		26	0.74	51	0.00	28	0.06	25	0.33	5	0.51	22	0.41
Zak 1937		12	0.78	42	0.00	23	0.11	15	0.38	6	0.49	18	0.43
Zak 1951		19	0.76	79	0.00	22	0.09	17	0.37	7	0.49	19	0.43
Random 1		90	-0.21	89	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	67	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		88	-0.07	67	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	74	0.03	88	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.17	90	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	66	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).