Rossi 2007

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		36	0.54	35	0.00	61	0.07	48	0.07	85	0.02	61	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		9	0.67	63	0.00	27	0.06	27	0.28	67	0.04	29	0.11
Ashkenazy 1981		52	0.49	60	0.00	65	0.03	77	0.03	83	0.03	82	0.03
Bacha 2000		1	0.72	10	0.02	10	0.10	10	0.50	23	0.23	9	0.34
Badura 1965		63	0.44	76	0.00	82	0.03	78	0.03	87	0.02	87	0.02
Barbosa 1983		48	0.50	67	0.00	26	0.06	33	0.19	70	0.04	35	0.09
Biret 1990		7	0.70	27	0.01	7	0.11	8	0.52	56	0.05	21	0.16
Blet 2003		51	0.49	40	0.00	47	0.05	65	0.05	74	0.03	58	0.04
Block 1995		55	0.47	39	0.00	37	0.04	37	0.15	77	0.03	45	0.07
Blumental 1952		6	0.71	2	0.14	2	0.15	1	0.61	16	0.24	6	0.38
Boshniakovich 1969		68	0.41	44	0.00	75	0.05	60	0.05	83	0.03	64	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		10	0.66	74	0.00	29	0.06	19	0.35	54	0.04	26	0.12
Bunin 1987		87	0.05	71	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	91	0.01	91	0.01
Bunin 1987b		88	0.03	72	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	91	0.01	89	0.01
Chiu 1999		13	0.65	52	0.00	41	0.05	34	0.17	72	0.03	41	0.07
Cohen 1997		30	0.57	36	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.10	25	0.29	19	0.17
Cortot 1951		47	0.51	55	0.00	33	0.05	44	0.11	41	0.11	31	0.11
Csalog 1996		74	0.38	24	0.01	25	0.07	28	0.25	37	0.16	15	0.20
Czerny 1949		59	0.44	21	0.01	73	0.04	74	0.04	86	0.02	79	0.03
Czerny 1990		8	0.69	31	0.00	11	0.10	7	0.53	82	0.03	24	0.13
Duchoud 2007		83	0.29	48	0.00	83	0.03	81	0.03	86	0.02	86	0.02
Ezaki 2006		3	0.72	18	0.01	12	0.14	6	0.55	52	0.04	22	0.15
Falvay 1989		12	0.66	11	0.02	9	0.14	11	0.46	9	0.53	3	0.49
Farrell 1958		5	0.71	6	0.05	3	0.14	4	0.56	17	0.44	2	0.50
Ferenczy 1958		38	0.54	56	0.00	51	0.07	49	0.07	69	0.04	50	0.05
Fliere 1977		54	0.48	43	0.00	69	0.04	70	0.04	84	0.03	66	0.03
Fou 1978		15	0.63	34	0.00	32	0.06	26	0.29	85	0.03	34	0.09
Francois 1956		27	0.58	37	0.00	24	0.10	20	0.34	51	0.05	25	0.13
Friedman 1923		31	0.56	57	0.00	60	0.05	57	0.05	59	0.05	52	0.05
Friedman 1923b		33	0.56	64	0.00	59	0.05	58	0.05	58	0.05	51	0.05
Friedman 1930		32	0.56	33	0.00	58	0.05	63	0.05	67	0.04	59	0.04
Garcia 2007		29	0.57	19	0.01	43	0.05	40	0.14	77	0.03	48	0.06
Garcia 2007b		44	0.51	30	0.00	44	0.07	41	0.14	73	0.04	47	0.07
Gierzod 1998		53	0.48	41	0.00	55	0.05	56	0.05	78	0.03	62	0.04
Gornostaeva 1994		34	0.54	20	0.01	21	0.07	29	0.24	54	0.05	30	0.11
Groot 1988		42	0.52	88	0.00	34	0.04	42	0.14	65	0.05	38	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		21	0.62	7	0.03	42	0.05	36	0.15	76	0.04	39	0.08
Hatto 1993		46	0.51	89	0.00	66	0.04	75	0.04	71	0.04	65	0.04
Hatto 1997		41	0.52	32	0.00	67	0.03	83	0.03	75	0.04	77	0.03
Horowitz 1949		76	0.38	58	0.00	77	0.03	84	0.03	78	0.04	70	0.03
Indjic 1988		40	0.52	61	0.00	68	0.04	73	0.04	76	0.04	57	0.04
Kapell 1951		71	0.40	42	0.00	36	0.05	38	0.15	85	0.03	44	0.07
Kissin 1993		50	0.49	51	0.00	53	0.06	50	0.06	70	0.03	56	0.04
Kushner 1989		49	0.50	84	0.00	56	0.05	59	0.05	75	0.04	54	0.04
Luisada 1991		22	0.61	90	0.00	28	0.06	25	0.30	72	0.04	28	0.11
Lushtak 2004		35	0.54	79	0.00	52	0.06	54	0.06	83	0.03	63	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		45	0.51	3	0.08	18	0.07	15	0.40	32	0.20	10	0.28
Magaloff 1978		20	0.62	29	0.00	13	0.10	12	0.44	21	0.33	5	0.38
Magin 1975		75	0.38	23	0.01	57	0.04	72	0.04	86	0.03	68	0.03
Michalowski 1933		81	0.32	68	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	89	0.02	85	0.02
Milkina 1970		4	0.71	9	0.03	5	0.16	3	0.60	30	0.26	4	0.39
Mohovich 1999		17	0.62	49	0.00	16	0.12	9	0.51	60	0.05	20	0.16
Moravec 1969		14	0.64	4	0.07	4	0.15	5	0.55	6	0.56	1	0.55
Morozova 2008		60	0.44	86	0.00	71	0.05	66	0.05	87	0.02	76	0.03
Neighaus 1950		58	0.45	75	0.00	74	0.04	69	0.04	86	0.02	83	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		39	0.53	25	0.01	30	0.07	24	0.31	78	0.03	33	0.10
Ohlsson 1999		73	0.40	28	0.01	79	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03	73	0.03
Osinska 1989		2	0.72	1	0.20	1	0.20	2	0.61	34	0.22	7	0.37
Pachmann 1927		70	0.41	65	0.00	85	0.04	68	0.04	85	0.02	71	0.03
Paderewski 1930		25	0.59	77	0.00	39	0.07	31	0.21	85	0.03	36	0.08
Perlemuter 1992		26	0.58	50	0.00	46	0.06	55	0.06	68	0.04	49	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		65	0.42	16	0.01	23	0.08	30	0.24	45	0.12	18	0.17
Poblocka 1999		84	0.27	45	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	74	0.04	67	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		37	0.54	81	0.00	35	0.06	39	0.15	79	0.03	43	0.07
Rachmaninoff 1923		19	0.62	17	0.01	40	0.05	35	0.15	74	0.03	42	0.07
Rangell 2001		80	0.33	26	0.01	38	0.06	43	0.12	52	0.04	46	0.07
Richter 1976		86	0.13	38	0.00	86	0.03	82	0.03	89	0.01	84	0.02
Rosen 1989		18	0.62	22	0.01	8	0.14	13	0.44	73	0.04	23	0.13
Rosenthal 1930		78	0.35	47	0.00	64	0.05	61	0.05	86	0.02	80	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		72	0.40	91	0.00	49	0.09	47	0.09	42	0.15	27	0.12
Rosenthal 1931b		69	0.41	69	0.00	50	0.10	46	0.10	40	0.13	32	0.11
Rosenthal 1931c		77	0.37	62	0.00	48	0.06	53	0.06	44	0.11	40	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d		61	0.44	87	0.00	31	0.06	32	0.19	31	0.20	16	0.19
Rossi 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rubinstein 1939		28	0.58	13	0.01	17	0.09	16	0.39	41	0.12	14	0.22
Rubinstein 1952		67	0.41	8	0.03	15	0.11	23	0.32	42	0.19	13	0.25
Rubinstein 1966		16	0.62	12	0.02	14	0.10	18	0.35	42	0.18	12	0.25
Schilhawsky 1960		82	0.30	66	0.00	78	0.03	85	0.03	83	0.03	75	0.03
Shebanova 2002		64	0.42	82	0.00	70	0.05	64	0.05	84	0.03	60	0.04
Smith 1975		24	0.59	15	0.01	6	0.12	14	0.42	37	0.15	11	0.25
Sokolov 2002		79	0.34	70	0.00	76	0.05	62	0.05	78	0.03	53	0.04
Sztompka 1959		43	0.52	53	0.00	54	0.06	51	0.06	87	0.02	72	0.03
Tomsic 1995		56	0.47	14	0.01	22	0.07	21	0.34	27	0.40	8	0.37
Uninsky 1932		66	0.42	73	0.00	72	0.04	71	0.04	84	0.03	78	0.03
Uninsky 1971		85	0.23	46	0.00	81	0.04	76	0.04	84	0.03	74	0.03
Wasowski 1980		23	0.59	5	0.06	19	0.10	17	0.36	45	0.09	17	0.18
Zak 1937		57	0.46	85	0.00	62	0.04	67	0.04	77	0.03	69	0.03
Zak 1951		62	0.44	83	0.00	63	0.06	52	0.06	74	0.03	55	0.04
Average		11	0.66	59	0.00	20	0.07	22	0.33	86	0.02	37	0.08
Random 1		91	-0.31	54	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	77	0.03	88	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.25	78	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01	90	0.01
Random 3		89	-0.14	80	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	60	0.04	81	0.03

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).