Afanassiev 2001

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

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).