Smith 1975

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

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).