Magin 1975

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		37	0.46	64	0.00	63	0.05	54	0.05	28	0.31	52	0.12
Anderszewski 2003		39	0.46	65	0.00	35	0.06	36	0.20	64	0.05	55	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		61	0.42	56	0.00	71	0.04	74	0.04	32	0.25	58	0.10
Bacha 2000		85	0.27	89	0.00	87	0.03	82	0.03	65	0.03	86	0.03
Badura 1965		66	0.40	84	0.00	59	0.03	77	0.03	48	0.07	76	0.05
Barbosa 1983		20	0.53	24	0.00	15	0.07	14	0.57	31	0.33	20	0.43
Biret 1990		31	0.48	6	0.02	23	0.10	22	0.47	32	0.35	23	0.41
Blet 2003		49	0.45	34	0.00	62	0.04	62	0.04	20	0.27	56	0.10
Block 1995		81	0.34	54	0.00	67	0.03	85	0.03	54	0.05	82	0.04
Blumental 1952		41	0.46	85	0.00	51	0.05	51	0.05	56	0.06	77	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		13	0.56	17	0.01	14	0.08	8	0.61	16	0.43	14	0.51
Brailowsky 1960		42	0.46	30	0.00	27	0.08	37	0.19	37	0.29	34	0.23
Bunin 1987		54	0.43	86	0.00	56	0.04	65	0.04	41	0.11	66	0.07
Bunin 1987b		62	0.41	32	0.00	61	0.04	70	0.04	47	0.07	73	0.05
Chiu 1999		69	0.40	33	0.00	55	0.04	59	0.04	32	0.22	60	0.09
Cohen 1997		75	0.37	59	0.00	77	0.05	55	0.05	41	0.09	65	0.07
Cortot 1951		88	0.21	73	0.00	88	0.03	76	0.03	69	0.03	89	0.03
Csalog 1996		18	0.54	2	0.06	6	0.14	15	0.54	11	0.54	12	0.54
Czerny 1949		23	0.51	50	0.00	28	0.07	25	0.40	34	0.43	22	0.41
Czerny 1990		30	0.49	80	0.00	30	0.09	27	0.35	46	0.10	40	0.19
Duchoud 2007		82	0.32	53	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	34	0.39	53	0.11
Ezaki 2006		16	0.55	13	0.01	19	0.10	18	0.53	29	0.30	24	0.40
Falvay 1989		4	0.59	35	0.00	5	0.14	5	0.66	21	0.57	4	0.61
Farrell 1958		53	0.44	47	0.00	45	0.07	42	0.13	36	0.29	39	0.19
Ferenczy 1958		73	0.37	71	0.00	81	0.04	58	0.04	59	0.06	75	0.05
Fliere 1977		6	0.58	14	0.01	11	0.12	16	0.53	30	0.39	17	0.45
Fou 1978		21	0.52	26	0.00	29	0.07	32	0.30	38	0.18	35	0.23
Francois 1956		52	0.44	5	0.02	44	0.06	43	0.13	13	0.46	33	0.24
Friedman 1923		84	0.31	61	0.00	82	0.04	75	0.04	57	0.05	85	0.04
Friedman 1923b		83	0.31	22	0.00	83	0.04	71	0.04	70	0.04	83	0.04
Friedman 1930		59	0.42	28	0.00	40	0.06	41	0.15	7	0.59	31	0.30
Garcia 2007		58	0.42	81	0.00	49	0.08	47	0.08	15	0.51	38	0.20
Garcia 2007b		22	0.51	4	0.02	10	0.12	12	0.58	4	0.68	2	0.63
Gierzod 1998		2	0.61	7	0.01	2	0.17	2	0.72	17	0.52	5	0.61
Gornostaeva 1994		8	0.57	10	0.01	12	0.12	11	0.59	7	0.60	7	0.59
Groot 1988		32	0.48	76	0.00	21	0.08	26	0.38	15	0.39	28	0.38
Harasiewicz 1955		15	0.55	11	0.01	13	0.10	19	0.51	36	0.38	19	0.44
Hatto 1993		47	0.45	77	0.00	48	0.07	49	0.07	50	0.05	72	0.06
Hatto 1997		40	0.46	67	0.00	37	0.06	34	0.24	57	0.04	57	0.10
Horowitz 1949		79	0.35	39	0.00	80	0.03	78	0.03	34	0.19	61	0.08
Indjic 1988		50	0.44	74	0.00	46	0.09	46	0.09	50	0.05	64	0.07
Kapell 1951		26	0.49	60	0.00	36	0.07	35	0.22	38	0.25	36	0.23
Kissin 1993		27	0.49	25	0.00	32	0.11	29	0.34	36	0.36	30	0.35
Kushner 1989		3	0.60	23	0.00	3	0.18	3	0.67	17	0.51	9	0.58
Luisada 1991		28	0.49	55	0.00	54	0.05	53	0.05	30	0.30	50	0.12
Lushtak 2004		25	0.50	37	0.00	25	0.12	20	0.49	30	0.39	18	0.44
Malcuzynski 1961		51	0.44	90	0.00	52	0.05	52	0.05	46	0.09	63	0.07
Magaloff 1978		43	0.46	62	0.00	57	0.05	57	0.05	50	0.07	69	0.06
Magin 1975		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Michalowski 1933		74	0.37	8	0.01	78	0.04	63	0.04	4	0.62	44	0.16
Milkina 1970		12	0.56	43	0.00	16	0.07	10	0.60	29	0.40	15	0.49
Mohovich 1999		19	0.53	66	0.00	22	0.09	24	0.40	29	0.38	25	0.39
Moravec 1969		34	0.47	38	0.00	39	0.08	38	0.18	40	0.17	42	0.17
Morozova 2008		35	0.47	46	0.00	33	0.10	28	0.35	22	0.41	27	0.38
Neighaus 1950		80	0.34	51	0.00	84	0.04	69	0.04	42	0.11	67	0.07
Niedzielski 1931		87	0.26	82	0.00	85	0.03	79	0.03	54	0.05	79	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		71	0.39	78	0.00	73	0.04	68	0.04	56	0.05	80	0.04
Osinska 1989		7	0.58	44	0.00	9	0.17	4	0.67	35	0.43	11	0.54
Pachmann 1927		60	0.42	15	0.01	53	0.05	56	0.05	4	0.64	41	0.18
Paderewski 1930		86	0.27	87	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	45	0.12	74	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		46	0.45	20	0.00	43	0.06	40	0.15	12	0.45	32	0.26
Pierdomenico 2008		78	0.36	48	0.00	79	0.04	61	0.04	49	0.05	78	0.04
Poblocka 1999		33	0.48	19	0.00	34	0.06	33	0.27	57	0.07	45	0.14
Rabcewiczowa 1932		44	0.46	21	0.00	24	0.12	23	0.44	16	0.41	21	0.42
Rachmaninoff 1923		77	0.37	72	0.00	69	0.03	83	0.03	72	0.04	87	0.03
Rangell 2001		65	0.40	9	0.01	42	0.06	45	0.10	38	0.21	47	0.14
Richter 1976		24	0.50	27	0.00	26	0.08	30	0.34	24	0.42	26	0.38
Rosen 1989		14	0.55	12	0.01	20	0.08	21	0.47	13	0.55	13	0.51
Rosenthal 1930		57	0.43	40	0.00	66	0.04	72	0.04	35	0.29	54	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		56	0.43	45	0.00	60	0.04	66	0.04	18	0.45	49	0.13
Rosenthal 1931b		55	0.43	36	0.00	58	0.04	73	0.04	14	0.50	48	0.14
Rosenthal 1931c		67	0.40	49	0.00	65	0.04	60	0.04	60	0.05	84	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		64	0.40	63	0.00	68	0.03	84	0.03	25	0.36	59	0.10
Rossi 2007		72	0.38	88	0.00	75	0.03	87	0.03	37	0.15	62	0.07
Rubinstein 1939		36	0.47	79	0.00	50	0.05	50	0.05	35	0.27	51	0.12
Rubinstein 1952		5	0.58	3	0.02	4	0.18	7	0.64	16	0.54	8	0.59
Rubinstein 1966		10	0.56	29	0.00	17	0.08	13	0.58	34	0.41	16	0.49
Schilhawsky 1960		29	0.49	68	0.00	31	0.07	31	0.31	26	0.43	29	0.37
Shebanova 2002		45	0.45	69	0.00	47	0.08	48	0.08	35	0.25	46	0.14
Smith 1975		9	0.57	18	0.00	7	0.13	6	0.64	3	0.71	1	0.67
Sokolov 2002		70	0.40	58	0.00	64	0.04	67	0.04	46	0.08	68	0.06
Sztompka 1959		63	0.41	75	0.00	70	0.03	81	0.03	75	0.04	88	0.03
Tomsic 1995		48	0.45	41	0.00	38	0.06	39	0.16	26	0.31	37	0.22
Uninsky 1932		76	0.37	52	0.00	72	0.03	86	0.03	43	0.11	70	0.06
Uninsky 1971		68	0.40	70	0.00	74	0.04	64	0.04	72	0.04	81	0.04
Wasowski 1980		38	0.46	42	0.00	41	0.06	44	0.12	39	0.21	43	0.16
Zak 1937		17	0.54	31	0.00	18	0.09	17	0.53	12	0.59	10	0.56
Zak 1951		11	0.56	16	0.01	8	0.12	9	0.61	10	0.64	3	0.62
Average		1	0.72	1	0.67	1	0.66	1	0.83	29	0.44	6	0.60
Random 1		90	-0.02	91	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	34	0.20	71	0.06
Random 2		89	-0.02	83	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	83	0.02	91	0.01
Random 3		91	-0.11	57	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	71	0.03	90	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).