Shebanova 2002

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		51	0.41	29	0.00	52	0.05	57	0.05	30	0.26	45	0.11
Anderszewski 2003		47	0.42	43	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.07	52	0.06	61	0.06
Ashkenazy 1981		19	0.48	47	0.00	31	0.09	22	0.35	4	0.55	11	0.44
Bacha 2000		73	0.31	78	0.00	79	0.03	85	0.03	77	0.03	80	0.03
Badura 1965		65	0.35	87	0.00	60	0.06	50	0.06	41	0.12	55	0.08
Barbosa 1983		28	0.46	63	0.00	40	0.06	36	0.20	46	0.09	40	0.13
Biret 1990		15	0.50	26	0.00	11	0.13	10	0.56	32	0.34	12	0.44
Blet 2003		82	0.25	66	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	67	0.03	83	0.03
Block 1995		43	0.43	40	0.00	25	0.07	21	0.41	20	0.45	13	0.43
Blumental 1952		32	0.46	11	0.02	33	0.07	30	0.27	41	0.14	35	0.19
Boshniakovich 1969		48	0.41	64	0.00	56	0.05	53	0.05	79	0.03	76	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		60	0.38	45	0.00	58	0.04	67	0.04	54	0.06	62	0.05
Bunin 1987		41	0.43	16	0.01	28	0.08	26	0.32	13	0.41	21	0.36
Bunin 1987b		56	0.40	75	0.00	34	0.07	35	0.21	18	0.40	30	0.29
Chiu 1999		21	0.48	19	0.01	29	0.08	27	0.31	3	0.52	14	0.40
Cohen 1997		69	0.34	60	0.00	75	0.04	75	0.04	50	0.05	77	0.04
Cortot 1951		74	0.31	49	0.00	77	0.05	58	0.05	35	0.25	46	0.11
Csalog 1996		59	0.39	84	0.00	54	0.06	52	0.06	58	0.05	64	0.05
Czerny 1949		49	0.41	36	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	68	0.04	74	0.04
Czerny 1990		10	0.51	14	0.01	24	0.07	29	0.29	43	0.15	34	0.21
Duchoud 2007		44	0.43	27	0.00	26	0.07	25	0.33	3	0.66	10	0.47
Ezaki 2006		31	0.46	28	0.00	38	0.05	42	0.14	61	0.05	51	0.08
Falvay 1989		1	0.60	2	0.23	2	0.30	3	0.65	22	0.53	2	0.59
Farrell 1958		53	0.40	39	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	52	0.05	63	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		50	0.41	69	0.00	50	0.04	65	0.04	26	0.42	41	0.13
Fliere 1977		9	0.51	34	0.00	10	0.12	11	0.51	37	0.26	20	0.36
Fou 1978		61	0.38	67	0.00	68	0.04	78	0.04	79	0.03	81	0.03
Francois 1956		64	0.37	42	0.00	61	0.05	60	0.05	39	0.19	47	0.10
Friedman 1923		72	0.32	51	0.00	64	0.04	68	0.04	33	0.27	48	0.10
Friedman 1923b		77	0.30	85	0.00	63	0.05	56	0.05	33	0.27	43	0.12
Friedman 1930		26	0.47	33	0.00	15	0.10	12	0.51	5	0.68	3	0.59
Garcia 2007		78	0.29	79	0.00	71	0.04	66	0.04	45	0.06	65	0.05
Garcia 2007b		58	0.39	50	0.00	57	0.05	54	0.05	51	0.06	66	0.05
Gierzod 1998		4	0.55	15	0.01	8	0.15	6	0.60	38	0.27	17	0.40
Gornostaeva 1994		39	0.44	70	0.00	46	0.07	46	0.07	45	0.08	59	0.07
Groot 1988		42	0.43	3	0.08	9	0.12	17	0.43	21	0.32	19	0.37
Harasiewicz 1955		30	0.46	48	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.12	59	0.05	56	0.08
Hatto 1993		14	0.50	12	0.01	4	0.12	5	0.61	14	0.51	7	0.56
Hatto 1997		17	0.49	31	0.00	6	0.12	8	0.57	20	0.45	8	0.51
Horowitz 1949		75	0.30	71	0.00	72	0.07	47	0.07	21	0.36	36	0.16
Indjic 1988		13	0.50	4	0.06	5	0.21	4	0.62	18	0.50	6	0.56
Kapell 1951		68	0.35	72	0.00	76	0.04	70	0.04	78	0.03	82	0.03
Kissin 1993		20	0.48	13	0.01	21	0.07	28	0.30	39	0.31	28	0.30
Kushner 1989		3	0.56	21	0.01	12	0.14	7	0.58	40	0.26	18	0.39
Luisada 1991		52	0.41	24	0.01	51	0.04	62	0.04	40	0.18	52	0.08
Lushtak 2004		2	0.56	1	0.23	1	0.23	1	0.68	9	0.58	1	0.63
Malcuzynski 1961		35	0.45	25	0.01	36	0.06	33	0.25	61	0.05	44	0.11
Magaloff 1978		12	0.51	10	0.02	18	0.10	18	0.43	25	0.37	15	0.40
Magin 1975		33	0.45	80	0.00	32	0.07	34	0.25	47	0.08	39	0.14
Michalowski 1933		86	0.11	81	0.00	86	0.03	87	0.03	77	0.02	88	0.02
Milkina 1970		23	0.47	61	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.16	68	0.05	50	0.09
Mohovich 1999		25	0.47	17	0.01	19	0.10	16	0.44	36	0.21	29	0.30
Moravec 1969		29	0.46	52	0.00	47	0.06	48	0.06	53	0.07	60	0.06
Morozova 2008		40	0.44	7	0.04	37	0.06	41	0.15	44	0.10	42	0.12
Neighaus 1950		46	0.43	65	0.00	48	0.06	49	0.06	15	0.44	37	0.16
Niedzielski 1931		81	0.26	53	0.00	73	0.05	59	0.05	41	0.11	58	0.07
Ohlsson 1999		18	0.49	32	0.00	20	0.10	14	0.47	14	0.49	9	0.48
Osinska 1989		5	0.54	5	0.05	3	0.21	2	0.67	28	0.48	4	0.57
Pachmann 1927		83	0.25	56	0.00	82	0.03	82	0.03	58	0.05	72	0.04
Paderewski 1930		87	0.09	88	0.00	87	0.03	84	0.03	85	0.02	87	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		55	0.40	20	0.01	27	0.08	37	0.20	8	0.50	24	0.32
Pierdomenico 2008		62	0.37	68	0.00	67	0.04	69	0.04	39	0.20	49	0.09
Poblocka 1999		11	0.51	38	0.00	30	0.10	24	0.33	44	0.14	31	0.21
Rabcewiczowa 1932		36	0.45	58	0.00	17	0.09	19	0.41	29	0.29	22	0.34
Rachmaninoff 1923		71	0.32	57	0.00	43	0.06	44	0.12	66	0.04	57	0.07
Rangell 2001		22	0.47	35	0.00	22	0.06	32	0.26	24	0.40	26	0.32
Richter 1976		57	0.39	44	0.00	66	0.04	64	0.04	59	0.04	71	0.04
Rosen 1989		8	0.52	6	0.04	7	0.14	9	0.57	10	0.58	5	0.57
Rosenthal 1930		80	0.26	59	0.00	81	0.04	80	0.04	62	0.04	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.23	73	0.00	85	0.04	76	0.04	64	0.04	73	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		79	0.27	82	0.00	80	0.04	77	0.04	74	0.04	78	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		67	0.35	83	0.00	62	0.04	71	0.04	60	0.05	79	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.23	89	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	80	0.03	86	0.03
Rossi 2007		70	0.32	41	0.00	78	0.04	81	0.04	61	0.05	68	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		54	0.40	23	0.01	59	0.04	74	0.04	67	0.04	70	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		7	0.52	9	0.02	14	0.09	15	0.46	36	0.22	27	0.32
Rubinstein 1966		6	0.53	18	0.01	13	0.08	13	0.51	43	0.22	23	0.33
Schilhawsky 1960		38	0.44	30	0.00	49	0.04	73	0.04	41	0.18	54	0.08
Shebanova 2002		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Smith 1975		66	0.35	86	0.00	69	0.04	63	0.04	62	0.05	69	0.04
Sokolov 2002		63	0.37	46	0.00	70	0.05	61	0.05	67	0.03	67	0.04
Sztompka 1959		45	0.43	76	0.00	55	0.06	51	0.06	43	0.11	53	0.08
Tomsic 1995		37	0.44	62	0.00	39	0.05	39	0.17	29	0.26	32	0.21
Uninsky 1932		76	0.30	54	0.00	74	0.04	79	0.04	71	0.03	84	0.03
Uninsky 1971		24	0.47	8	0.03	35	0.06	31	0.27	42	0.16	33	0.21
Wasowski 1980		34	0.45	22	0.01	41	0.07	38	0.19	43	0.12	38	0.15
Zak 1937		16	0.49	37	0.00	16	0.09	20	0.41	27	0.40	16	0.40
Zak 1951		27	0.46	55	0.00	23	0.09	23	0.34	28	0.31	25	0.32
Random 1		90	-0.15	74	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	82	0.02	89	0.01
Random 2		88	0.01	77	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	56	0.04	85	0.03
Random 3		89	-0.13	90	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	82	0.02	90	0.01

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).