Gierzod 1998

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		48	0.52	69	0.00	52	0.06	53	0.06	3	0.59	50	0.19
Anderszewski 2003		39	0.54	65	0.00	28	0.06	27	0.35	17	0.52	30	0.43
Ashkenazy 1981		51	0.51	46	0.00	66	0.03	78	0.03	14	0.44	72	0.11
Bacha 2000		79	0.37	85	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	48	0.05	89	0.03
Badura 1965		70	0.42	88	0.00	71	0.04	65	0.04	26	0.34	64	0.12
Barbosa 1983		19	0.61	10	0.02	15	0.18	13	0.54	7	0.66	16	0.60
Biret 1990		36	0.55	12	0.01	16	0.11	20	0.47	9	0.56	23	0.51
Blet 2003		65	0.43	58	0.00	76	0.03	83	0.03	22	0.26	78	0.09
Block 1995		77	0.38	32	0.00	56	0.05	59	0.05	30	0.28	65	0.12
Blumental 1952		42	0.53	17	0.01	43	0.08	42	0.19	22	0.48	43	0.30
Boshniakovich 1969		12	0.64	3	0.17	4	0.18	10	0.60	2	0.72	9	0.66
Brailowsky 1960		56	0.48	54	0.00	54	0.08	47	0.08	26	0.45	48	0.19
Bunin 1987		62	0.46	82	0.00	70	0.04	67	0.04	30	0.21	80	0.09
Bunin 1987b		64	0.44	78	0.00	69	0.04	68	0.04	31	0.24	75	0.10
Chiu 1999		50	0.51	59	0.00	53	0.06	52	0.06	4	0.52	51	0.18
Cohen 1997		75	0.39	76	0.00	78	0.04	69	0.04	17	0.29	73	0.11
Cortot 1951		86	0.27	86	0.00	86	0.03	84	0.03	53	0.07	86	0.05
Csalog 1996		41	0.54	77	0.00	31	0.07	26	0.36	7	0.60	28	0.46
Czerny 1949		14	0.63	8	0.02	11	0.15	15	0.52	8	0.70	17	0.60
Czerny 1990		5	0.66	13	0.01	6	0.15	4	0.63	10	0.74	5	0.68
Duchoud 2007		78	0.38	66	0.00	85	0.04	71	0.04	38	0.27	76	0.10
Ezaki 2006		23	0.59	21	0.00	27	0.08	22	0.45	12	0.56	24	0.50
Falvay 1989		6	0.66	7	0.03	5	0.17	5	0.63	6	0.69	7	0.66
Farrell 1958		73	0.42	34	0.00	68	0.04	74	0.04	43	0.16	83	0.08
Ferenczy 1958		53	0.50	38	0.00	63	0.04	66	0.04	15	0.54	58	0.15
Fliere 1977		4	0.66	9	0.02	3	0.19	3	0.65	1	0.72	3	0.68
Fou 1978		15	0.62	49	0.00	19	0.10	18	0.51	5	0.57	19	0.54
Francois 1956		67	0.43	33	0.00	77	0.03	75	0.03	29	0.27	82	0.09
Friedman 1923		85	0.32	50	0.00	84	0.03	82	0.03	51	0.06	88	0.04
Friedman 1923b		83	0.34	73	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	51	0.06	87	0.04
Friedman 1930		69	0.43	45	0.00	60	0.05	57	0.05	11	0.52	55	0.16
Garcia 2007		68	0.43	60	0.00	72	0.05	58	0.05	21	0.44	59	0.15
Garcia 2007b		58	0.47	74	0.00	58	0.04	70	0.04	28	0.33	74	0.11
Gierzod 1998		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Gornostaeva 1994		26	0.59	48	0.00	34	0.06	25	0.39	3	0.65	25	0.50
Groot 1988		66	0.43	42	0.00	57	0.05	56	0.05	37	0.16	81	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		2	0.71	2	0.23	2	0.35	2	0.81	2	0.82	2	0.81
Hatto 1993		13	0.63	16	0.01	9	0.16	8	0.62	5	0.72	6	0.67
Hatto 1997		11	0.64	6	0.03	8	0.10	7	0.62	5	0.70	8	0.66
Horowitz 1949		82	0.36	87	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	20	0.39	77	0.09
Indjic 1988		7	0.64	4	0.05	7	0.12	6	0.63	4	0.73	4	0.68
Kapell 1951		27	0.58	53	0.00	39	0.08	39	0.23	17	0.56	39	0.36
Kissin 1993		8	0.64	62	0.00	14	0.14	14	0.52	4	0.75	11	0.62
Kushner 1989		10	0.64	18	0.01	12	0.11	11	0.60	8	0.63	13	0.61
Luisada 1991		37	0.55	79	0.00	41	0.08	41	0.20	9	0.60	40	0.35
Lushtak 2004		28	0.58	40	0.00	20	0.09	24	0.44	7	0.61	22	0.52
Malcuzynski 1961		40	0.54	61	0.00	40	0.11	31	0.34	21	0.48	36	0.40
Magaloff 1978		31	0.57	55	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.28	5	0.64	31	0.42
Magin 1975		18	0.61	22	0.00	18	0.11	16	0.52	1	0.72	12	0.61
Michalowski 1933		87	0.24	63	0.00	87	0.03	76	0.03	28	0.23	84	0.08
Milkina 1970		3	0.66	5	0.03	10	0.20	9	0.60	8	0.62	14	0.61
Mohovich 1999		38	0.54	26	0.00	23	0.08	32	0.34	23	0.46	38	0.40
Moravec 1969		34	0.56	51	0.00	44	0.08	44	0.16	14	0.51	44	0.29
Morozova 2008		47	0.53	64	0.00	47	0.07	49	0.07	10	0.57	47	0.20
Neighaus 1950		57	0.47	44	0.00	51	0.06	54	0.06	13	0.49	54	0.17
Niedzielski 1931		81	0.36	36	0.00	73	0.04	61	0.04	17	0.38	62	0.12
Ohlsson 1999		43	0.53	80	0.00	48	0.08	45	0.08	6	0.58	45	0.22
Osinska 1989		1	0.73	1	0.25	1	0.25	1	0.81	2	0.81	1	0.81
Pachmann 1927		71	0.42	27	0.00	80	0.03	81	0.03	17	0.47	63	0.12
Paderewski 1930		84	0.33	83	0.00	79	0.03	77	0.03	12	0.44	70	0.11
Perlemuter 1992		63	0.45	67	0.00	75	0.03	80	0.03	20	0.40	68	0.11
Pierdomenico 2008		49	0.52	39	0.00	50	0.06	50	0.06	14	0.54	52	0.18
Poblocka 1999		29	0.57	35	0.00	22	0.08	33	0.33	18	0.48	35	0.40
Rabcewiczowa 1932		52	0.50	52	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.21	14	0.43	42	0.30
Rachmaninoff 1923		72	0.42	68	0.00	55	0.07	48	0.07	23	0.43	53	0.17
Rangell 2001		45	0.53	28	0.00	49	0.05	55	0.05	16	0.51	56	0.16
Richter 1976		25	0.59	24	0.00	26	0.06	30	0.34	6	0.68	27	0.48
Rosen 1989		16	0.62	29	0.00	25	0.06	28	0.35	2	0.68	26	0.49
Rosenthal 1930		59	0.46	57	0.00	67	0.04	72	0.04	21	0.47	60	0.14
Rosenthal 1931		74	0.40	71	0.00	64	0.03	79	0.03	25	0.39	71	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		76	0.38	84	0.00	74	0.04	63	0.04	21	0.38	67	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		60	0.46	41	0.00	62	0.04	60	0.04	18	0.42	61	0.13
Rosenthal 1931d		80	0.37	75	0.00	65	0.04	73	0.04	27	0.34	66	0.12
Rossi 2007		55	0.48	37	0.00	61	0.04	64	0.04	5	0.54	57	0.15
Rubinstein 1939		54	0.49	81	0.00	59	0.04	62	0.04	33	0.30	69	0.11
Rubinstein 1952		21	0.60	56	0.00	29	0.06	29	0.35	22	0.48	34	0.41
Rubinstein 1966		9	0.64	14	0.01	13	0.14	12	0.57	13	0.65	15	0.61
Schilhawsky 1960		32	0.57	30	0.00	37	0.06	43	0.19	14	0.53	41	0.32
Shebanova 2002		35	0.55	23	0.00	35	0.06	38	0.27	6	0.60	37	0.40
Smith 1975		33	0.56	19	0.00	36	0.06	35	0.28	6	0.63	32	0.42
Sokolov 2002		44	0.53	31	0.00	46	0.06	51	0.06	3	0.69	46	0.20
Sztompka 1959		30	0.57	43	0.00	24	0.07	34	0.33	14	0.59	29	0.44
Tomsic 1995		46	0.53	25	0.00	45	0.08	46	0.08	16	0.47	49	0.19
Uninsky 1932		61	0.46	15	0.01	33	0.07	37	0.27	15	0.61	33	0.41
Uninsky 1971		17	0.61	11	0.01	17	0.10	17	0.52	2	0.76	10	0.63
Wasowski 1980		24	0.59	72	0.00	21	0.08	19	0.48	5	0.59	21	0.53
Zak 1937		20	0.60	47	0.00	32	0.07	23	0.45	8	0.65	20	0.54
Zak 1951		22	0.60	20	0.00	30	0.07	21	0.47	7	0.67	18	0.56
Random 1		90	-0.08	70	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	78	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		88	0.07	89	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	9	0.45	79	0.09
Random 3		89	-0.01	90	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	29	0.20	85	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).