Zak 1937

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	0.81	11	0.00	9	0.09	8	0.49	19	0.40	9	0.44
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.70	48	0.00	46	0.05	50	0.05	26	0.25	57	0.11
Ashkenazy 1981		11	0.78	24	0.00	7	0.09	13	0.38	7	0.48	11	0.43
Bacha 2000		73	0.56	49	0.00	65	0.03	75	0.03	57	0.04	85	0.03
Badura 1965		49	0.68	25	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	19	0.50	46	0.17
Barbosa 1983		72	0.56	13	0.00	48	0.04	60	0.04	14	0.36	52	0.12
Biret 1990		43	0.69	50	0.00	38	0.04	35	0.16	21	0.33	39	0.23
Blet 2003		53	0.66	51	0.00	67	0.03	84	0.03	37	0.16	71	0.07
Block 1995		68	0.59	26	0.00	59	0.04	59	0.04	20	0.26	61	0.10
Blumental 1952		47	0.68	52	0.00	58	0.06	46	0.06	72	0.04	76	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		21	0.74	16	0.00	17	0.08	12	0.40	6	0.57	6	0.48
Brailowsky 1960		67	0.59	12	0.00	69	0.03	80	0.03	32	0.23	64	0.08
Bunin 1987		63	0.62	53	0.00	61	0.04	61	0.04	9	0.49	48	0.14
Bunin 1987b		64	0.61	54	0.00	60	0.03	72	0.03	10	0.49	51	0.12
Chiu 1999		51	0.67	27	0.00	32	0.05	39	0.15	6	0.45	33	0.26
Cohen 1997		87	0.41	28	0.00	83	0.03	78	0.03	48	0.06	81	0.04
Cortot 1951		45	0.68	55	0.00	56	0.04	58	0.04	22	0.40	50	0.13
Csalog 1996		77	0.52	17	0.00	71	0.03	83	0.03	23	0.31	60	0.10
Czerny 1949		31	0.71	29	0.00	30	0.05	31	0.20	27	0.43	29	0.29
Czerny 1990		17	0.76	10	0.00	36	0.05	33	0.18	22	0.29	38	0.23
Duchoud 2007		69	0.58	14	0.00	75	0.04	64	0.04	32	0.19	63	0.09
Ezaki 2006		6	0.80	30	0.00	10	0.11	9	0.46	7	0.56	5	0.51
Falvay 1989		78	0.51	31	0.00	81	0.04	55	0.04	47	0.12	68	0.07
Farrell 1958		55	0.65	56	0.00	50	0.04	57	0.04	42	0.16	65	0.08
Ferenczy 1958		59	0.63	57	0.00	72	0.03	73	0.03	26	0.27	62	0.09
Fliere 1977		5	0.81	58	0.00	5	0.12	6	0.50	20	0.38	8	0.44
Fou 1978		34	0.71	32	0.00	49	0.04	62	0.04	36	0.15	66	0.08
Francois 1956		65	0.59	59	0.00	77	0.04	66	0.04	60	0.04	84	0.04
Friedman 1923		23	0.74	60	0.00	34	0.06	30	0.21	17	0.49	25	0.32
Friedman 1923b		22	0.74	18	0.00	29	0.05	27	0.22	16	0.51	24	0.33
Friedman 1930		28	0.72	61	0.00	41	0.05	37	0.16	11	0.52	28	0.29
Garcia 2007		52	0.67	33	0.00	74	0.04	67	0.04	59	0.05	79	0.04
Garcia 2007b		57	0.64	62	0.00	66	0.03	85	0.03	76	0.04	90	0.03
Gierzod 1998		15	0.77	4	0.00	26	0.06	14	0.34	24	0.36	19	0.35
Gornostaeva 1994		75	0.55	34	0.00	63	0.04	70	0.04	48	0.06	77	0.05
Groot 1988		56	0.65	63	0.00	31	0.04	38	0.15	11	0.48	32	0.27
Harasiewicz 1955		9	0.78	64	0.00	3	0.24	3	0.64	2	0.58	2	0.61
Hatto 1993		16	0.76	65	0.00	14	0.09	15	0.33	17	0.38	20	0.35
Hatto 1997		13	0.77	66	0.00	16	0.13	17	0.33	17	0.39	18	0.36
Horowitz 1949		37	0.70	67	0.00	45	0.06	44	0.11	19	0.46	41	0.22
Indjic 1988		12	0.77	68	0.00	15	0.11	16	0.33	18	0.39	16	0.36
Kapell 1951		18	0.75	35	0.00	4	0.13	5	0.50	5	0.43	7	0.46
Kissin 1993		3	0.82	69	0.00	6	0.11	4	0.54	7	0.53	4	0.53
Kushner 1989		19	0.75	36	0.00	37	0.05	28	0.22	24	0.35	30	0.28
Luisada 1991		7	0.80	70	0.00	11	0.12	10	0.43	10	0.41	12	0.42
Lushtak 2004		14	0.77	6	0.00	12	0.13	11	0.40	4	0.45	13	0.42
Malcuzynski 1961		80	0.48	71	0.00	62	0.03	79	0.03	36	0.16	69	0.07
Magaloff 1978		60	0.63	72	0.00	64	0.04	71	0.04	28	0.24	59	0.10
Magin 1975		29	0.72	19	0.00	42	0.05	40	0.14	25	0.32	42	0.21
Michalowski 1933		70	0.58	73	0.00	70	0.03	82	0.03	43	0.13	72	0.06
Milkina 1970		40	0.70	20	0.00	24	0.06	34	0.17	20	0.40	34	0.26
Mohovich 1999		38	0.70	74	0.00	44	0.06	42	0.13	21	0.45	36	0.24
Moravec 1969		82	0.43	37	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	74	0.04	86	0.03
Morozova 2008		8	0.79	75	0.00	13	0.07	23	0.25	19	0.38	26	0.31
Neighaus 1950		33	0.71	76	0.00	18	0.09	18	0.31	23	0.38	23	0.34
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.65	77	0.00	54	0.04	63	0.04	30	0.31	55	0.11
Ohlsson 1999		32	0.71	21	0.00	27	0.06	20	0.29	14	0.41	21	0.34
Osinska 1989		24	0.73	38	0.00	35	0.05	25	0.24	26	0.34	27	0.29
Pachmann 1927		71	0.58	78	0.00	78	0.05	54	0.05	21	0.33	49	0.13
Paderewski 1930		61	0.62	79	0.00	76	0.04	65	0.04	37	0.14	70	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		25	0.73	3	0.00	33	0.05	29	0.22	23	0.29	35	0.25
Pierdomenico 2008		76	0.53	39	0.00	19	0.06	45	0.10	30	0.28	45	0.17
Poblocka 1999		35	0.71	40	0.00	25	0.06	19	0.31	20	0.42	15	0.36
Rabcewiczowa 1932		58	0.63	80	0.00	73	0.03	74	0.03	49	0.06	78	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		36	0.71	41	0.00	39	0.04	36	0.16	20	0.34	37	0.23
Rangell 2001		83	0.43	42	0.00	80	0.06	48	0.06	35	0.20	58	0.11
Richter 1976		62	0.62	15	0.00	55	0.04	68	0.04	19	0.47	47	0.14
Rosen 1989		44	0.69	81	0.00	51	0.04	56	0.04	35	0.18	67	0.08
Rosenthal 1930		79	0.51	22	0.00	79	0.05	52	0.05	47	0.05	75	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		86	0.41	82	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	82	0.03	91	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		85	0.42	83	0.00	87	0.03	76	0.03	65	0.05	83	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		84	0.42	7	0.00	84	0.03	81	0.03	63	0.04	89	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		88	0.40	5	0.00	88	0.04	69	0.04	74	0.04	82	0.04
Rossi 2007		81	0.46	84	0.00	82	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.04	87	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		30	0.72	8	0.00	23	0.06	41	0.13	16	0.37	40	0.22
Rubinstein 1952		66	0.59	43	0.00	22	0.07	43	0.13	38	0.30	43	0.20
Rubinstein 1966		27	0.72	2	0.00	21	0.06	24	0.25	5	0.53	17	0.36
Schilhawsky 1960		20	0.75	85	0.00	28	0.05	22	0.26	25	0.44	22	0.34
Shebanova 2002		10	0.78	86	0.00	8	0.09	7	0.49	16	0.38	10	0.43
Smith 1975		50	0.68	44	0.00	52	0.05	51	0.05	23	0.25	54	0.11
Sokolov 2002		48	0.68	9	0.00	20	0.06	21	0.27	4	0.50	14	0.37
Sztompka 1959		26	0.72	45	0.00	43	0.08	26	0.23	39	0.16	44	0.19
Tomsic 1995		74	0.56	87	0.00	68	0.03	86	0.03	23	0.42	56	0.11
Uninsky 1932		46	0.68	88	0.00	53	0.05	49	0.05	29	0.31	53	0.12
Uninsky 1971		42	0.69	46	0.00	40	0.04	32	0.19	27	0.38	31	0.27
Wasowski 1980		39	0.70	89	0.00	57	0.05	53	0.05	55	0.06	73	0.05
Zak 1937		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Zak 1951		1	0.99	1	0.99	1	0.98	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Average		2	0.87	47	0.00	2	0.48	2	0.70	9	0.47	3	0.57
Random 1		91	-0.17	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	38	0.12	88	0.03
Random 2		89	-0.03	91	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	24	0.22	74	0.05
Random 3		90	-0.14	23	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	41	0.14	80	0.04

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).