Garcia 2007b

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		7	0.75	90	0.00	15	0.10	13	0.49	35	0.27	24	0.36
Anderszewski 2003		60	0.59	87	0.00	60	0.05	55	0.05	50	0.05	68	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		25	0.67	59	0.00	39	0.06	33	0.25	42	0.12	36	0.17
Bacha 2000		46	0.63	60	0.00	51	0.04	75	0.04	16	0.34	41	0.12
Badura 1965		65	0.55	79	0.00	66	0.05	49	0.05	47	0.07	64	0.06
Barbosa 1983		88	0.40	84	0.00	74	0.03	82	0.03	62	0.04	82	0.03
Biret 1990		16	0.71	66	0.00	22	0.07	21	0.40	13	0.45	14	0.42
Blet 2003		39	0.64	49	0.00	45	0.04	45	0.08	22	0.32	37	0.16
Block 1995		69	0.53	20	0.00	33	0.05	38	0.17	48	0.06	51	0.10
Blumental 1952		52	0.62	47	0.00	23	0.06	36	0.20	31	0.16	34	0.18
Boshniakovich 1969		33	0.66	73	0.00	41	0.06	40	0.15	41	0.18	38	0.16
Brailowsky 1960		61	0.58	67	0.00	65	0.05	54	0.05	43	0.12	57	0.08
Bunin 1987		74	0.50	61	0.00	76	0.04	68	0.04	43	0.14	63	0.07
Bunin 1987b		76	0.49	52	0.00	75	0.04	64	0.04	43	0.14	61	0.07
Chiu 1999		63	0.55	12	0.01	64	0.04	61	0.04	84	0.03	79	0.03
Cohen 1997		87	0.41	5	0.01	80	0.04	77	0.04	33	0.25	52	0.10
Cortot 1951		21	0.69	23	0.00	32	0.09	28	0.32	12	0.46	21	0.38
Csalog 1996		77	0.48	74	0.00	73	0.03	83	0.03	74	0.03	84	0.03
Czerny 1949		26	0.67	62	0.00	18	0.09	12	0.50	33	0.34	16	0.41
Czerny 1990		47	0.63	85	0.00	52	0.05	59	0.05	60	0.04	76	0.04
Duchoud 2007		53	0.62	10	0.01	57	0.05	53	0.05	18	0.29	43	0.12
Ezaki 2006		58	0.61	45	0.00	63	0.05	51	0.05	88	0.03	70	0.04
Falvay 1989		85	0.44	8	0.01	88	0.04	72	0.04	68	0.04	72	0.04
Farrell 1958		37	0.65	2	0.03	14	0.10	20	0.41	19	0.43	11	0.42
Ferenczy 1958		27	0.66	44	0.00	24	0.09	27	0.34	8	0.47	17	0.40
Fliere 1977		10	0.74	41	0.00	9	0.11	8	0.54	27	0.27	20	0.38
Fou 1978		11	0.74	75	0.00	20	0.09	18	0.42	15	0.37	18	0.39
Francois 1956		56	0.62	43	0.00	55	0.04	62	0.04	28	0.27	53	0.10
Friedman 1923		45	0.63	33	0.00	48	0.04	74	0.04	39	0.31	47	0.11
Friedman 1923b		50	0.63	14	0.01	49	0.04	67	0.04	39	0.31	46	0.11
Friedman 1930		55	0.62	11	0.01	61	0.07	46	0.07	39	0.29	40	0.14
Garcia 2007		1	0.91	1	0.76	1	0.75	1	0.84	1	0.84	1	0.84
Garcia 2007b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Gierzod 1998		15	0.72	54	0.00	19	0.07	16	0.46	32	0.26	25	0.35
Gornostaeva 1994		38	0.64	18	0.00	58	0.05	50	0.05	18	0.29	45	0.12
Groot 1988		64	0.55	34	0.00	36	0.06	42	0.13	56	0.06	56	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		32	0.66	16	0.01	25	0.09	31	0.28	39	0.12	35	0.18
Hatto 1993		54	0.62	78	0.00	30	0.09	26	0.35	27	0.29	29	0.32
Hatto 1997		44	0.63	80	0.00	29	0.11	23	0.37	24	0.31	28	0.34
Horowitz 1949		40	0.64	86	0.00	62	0.07	47	0.07	39	0.29	39	0.14
Indjic 1988		43	0.63	88	0.00	28	0.07	24	0.37	24	0.31	27	0.34
Kapell 1951		14	0.73	4	0.01	6	0.16	11	0.51	12	0.33	15	0.41
Kissin 1993		19	0.69	81	0.00	40	0.09	35	0.24	62	0.04	50	0.10
Kushner 1989		31	0.66	35	0.00	38	0.05	30	0.30	32	0.24	30	0.27
Luisada 1991		23	0.68	68	0.00	37	0.05	34	0.24	50	0.06	42	0.12
Lushtak 2004		59	0.60	69	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.09	55	0.05	62	0.07
Malcuzynski 1961		67	0.54	37	0.00	67	0.06	48	0.06	43	0.13	54	0.09
Magaloff 1978		66	0.55	19	0.00	68	0.04	69	0.04	74	0.04	71	0.04
Magin 1975		20	0.69	25	0.00	27	0.07	32	0.26	38	0.16	33	0.20
Michalowski 1933		24	0.67	32	0.00	26	0.08	29	0.31	17	0.43	23	0.37
Milkina 1970		28	0.66	63	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	53	0.05	67	0.05
Mohovich 1999		22	0.68	89	0.00	43	0.05	39	0.15	46	0.09	44	0.12
Moravec 1969		73	0.50	17	0.00	79	0.04	70	0.04	44	0.13	59	0.07
Morozova 2008		35	0.65	70	0.00	47	0.04	63	0.04	61	0.04	75	0.04
Neighaus 1950		12	0.73	38	0.00	12	0.13	6	0.56	25	0.38	8	0.46
Niedzielski 1931		42	0.64	21	0.00	31	0.10	22	0.37	28	0.37	22	0.37
Ohlsson 1999		18	0.70	48	0.00	17	0.09	15	0.47	18	0.40	10	0.43
Osinska 1989		9	0.74	6	0.01	8	0.10	7	0.55	15	0.47	5	0.51
Pachmann 1927		78	0.47	50	0.00	82	0.02	85	0.02	79	0.03	88	0.02
Paderewski 1930		29	0.66	30	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.14	18	0.38	31	0.23
Perlemuter 1992		13	0.73	46	0.00	7	0.15	5	0.60	4	0.51	3	0.55
Pierdomenico 2008		68	0.53	7	0.01	35	0.06	43	0.12	27	0.32	32	0.20
Poblocka 1999		34	0.66	51	0.00	21	0.06	25	0.35	28	0.34	26	0.34
Rabcewiczowa 1932		36	0.65	29	0.00	46	0.04	65	0.04	33	0.17	58	0.08
Rachmaninoff 1923		30	0.66	31	0.00	34	0.07	37	0.20	49	0.05	49	0.10
Rangell 2001		81	0.46	64	0.00	81	0.04	66	0.04	76	0.03	86	0.03
Richter 1976		70	0.52	9	0.01	71	0.04	79	0.04	40	0.20	55	0.09
Rosen 1989		5	0.76	3	0.02	13	0.12	17	0.45	18	0.39	13	0.42
Rosenthal 1930		72	0.51	82	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	53	0.04	85	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		83	0.45	76	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	79	0.04	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		79	0.46	77	0.00	84	0.03	84	0.03	64	0.05	78	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		84	0.44	53	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	70	0.04	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		80	0.46	57	0.00	87	0.04	80	0.04	56	0.05	77	0.04
Rossi 2007		71	0.51	13	0.01	72	0.04	73	0.04	41	0.14	60	0.07
Rubinstein 1939		62	0.56	27	0.00	69	0.05	60	0.05	49	0.06	66	0.05
Rubinstein 1952		82	0.45	15	0.01	77	0.04	71	0.04	54	0.06	69	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		75	0.50	36	0.00	70	0.04	78	0.04	77	0.04	74	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		48	0.63	26	0.00	16	0.09	19	0.42	36	0.36	19	0.39
Shebanova 2002		6	0.76	71	0.00	4	0.15	4	0.61	24	0.35	7	0.46
Smith 1975		49	0.63	42	0.00	59	0.05	57	0.05	48	0.06	65	0.05
Sokolov 2002		57	0.61	39	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	31	0.21	48	0.10
Sztompka 1959		2	0.83	28	0.00	2	0.36	2	0.69	7	0.53	2	0.60
Tomsic 1995		86	0.42	55	0.00	83	0.02	86	0.02	70	0.04	81	0.03
Uninsky 1932		4	0.76	22	0.00	5	0.14	9	0.52	11	0.49	6	0.50
Uninsky 1971		17	0.71	58	0.00	10	0.10	14	0.48	26	0.40	9	0.44
Wasowski 1980		8	0.75	24	0.00	11	0.13	10	0.51	4	0.52	4	0.51
Zak 1937		41	0.64	56	0.00	50	0.04	76	0.04	85	0.03	80	0.03
Zak 1951		51	0.62	40	0.00	54	0.05	52	0.05	81	0.03	73	0.04
Average		3	0.81	65	0.00	3	0.24	3	0.66	29	0.27	12	0.42
Random 1		91	-0.29	72	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	64	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.13	91	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	57	0.03	89	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.17	83	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	59	0.04	91	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).