Wasowski 1980

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