Michalowski 1933

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