Rosenthal 1930

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		21	0.42	51	0.00	22	0.15	23	0.46	24	0.40	14	0.43
Anderszewski 2003		45	0.34	70	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.13	81	0.03	43	0.06
Ashkenazy 1981		42	0.35	42	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.12	62	0.03	44	0.06
Bacha 2000		48	0.33	71	0.00	46	0.06	49	0.06	56	0.04	46	0.05
Badura 1965		69	0.28	62	0.00	64	0.04	65	0.04	78	0.03	78	0.03
Barbosa 1983		29	0.39	26	0.00	35	0.09	34	0.30	66	0.05	28	0.12
Biret 1990		16	0.45	14	0.01	19	0.16	12	0.57	49	0.06	19	0.18
Blet 2003		34	0.37	28	0.00	31	0.08	32	0.35	58	0.05	25	0.13
Block 1995		43	0.34	78	0.00	33	0.07	29	0.38	63	0.04	29	0.12
Blumental 1952		8	0.50	15	0.01	7	0.21	8	0.68	26	0.47	7	0.57
Boshniakovich 1969		58	0.30	59	0.00	65	0.03	74	0.03	88	0.02	88	0.02
Brailowsky 1960		5	0.58	7	0.01	6	0.45	5	0.80	7	0.69	6	0.74
Bunin 1987		67	0.29	79	0.00	69	0.04	71	0.04	83	0.03	79	0.03
Bunin 1987b		70	0.28	72	0.00	63	0.04	61	0.04	80	0.03	69	0.03
Chiu 1999		74	0.26	80	0.00	58	0.05	52	0.05	77	0.03	53	0.04
Cohen 1997		75	0.26	81	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.10	72	0.03	49	0.05
Cortot 1951		68	0.28	36	0.00	57	0.05	51	0.05	50	0.07	45	0.06
Csalog 1996		39	0.35	56	0.00	38	0.05	40	0.16	64	0.04	41	0.08
Czerny 1949		61	0.30	8	0.01	67	0.04	60	0.04	78	0.03	77	0.03
Czerny 1990		27	0.40	21	0.00	20	0.17	19	0.50	49	0.07	18	0.19
Duchoud 2007		86	0.17	82	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02	86	0.02
Ezaki 2006		33	0.37	47	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.13	72	0.04	42	0.07
Falvay 1989		36	0.37	73	0.00	49	0.05	54	0.05	70	0.04	54	0.04
Farrell 1958		44	0.34	48	0.00	51	0.04	58	0.04	62	0.05	55	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		20	0.42	40	0.00	24	0.06	26	0.39	58	0.06	21	0.15
Fliere 1977		9	0.49	25	0.00	12	0.17	16	0.52	74	0.04	22	0.14
Fou 1978		22	0.42	23	0.00	26	0.08	27	0.39	57	0.05	23	0.14
Francois 1956		64	0.30	57	0.00	54	0.04	59	0.04	71	0.04	64	0.04
Friedman 1923		66	0.29	31	0.00	50	0.05	57	0.05	51	0.06	51	0.05
Friedman 1923b		59	0.30	17	0.00	47	0.05	50	0.05	55	0.05	50	0.05
Friedman 1930		51	0.32	63	0.00	39	0.06	37	0.23	47	0.07	26	0.13
Garcia 2007		85	0.18	74	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02	87	0.02
Garcia 2007b		72	0.27	38	0.00	62	0.04	64	0.04	82	0.02	80	0.03
Gierzod 1998		14	0.46	16	0.00	23	0.15	22	0.47	73	0.04	24	0.14
Gornostaeva 1994		47	0.33	83	0.00	56	0.06	48	0.06	75	0.03	63	0.04
Groot 1988		11	0.48	30	0.00	10	0.15	9	0.67	23	0.30	11	0.45
Harasiewicz 1955		31	0.38	65	0.00	25	0.06	30	0.36	79	0.03	39	0.10
Hatto 1993		17	0.44	84	0.00	21	0.13	21	0.48	80	0.03	31	0.12
Hatto 1997		23	0.42	85	0.00	30	0.13	25	0.40	78	0.03	35	0.11
Horowitz 1949		28	0.39	29	0.00	16	0.14	15	0.55	7	0.55	8	0.55
Indjic 1988		25	0.41	52	0.00	29	0.07	28	0.39	81	0.03	34	0.11
Kapell 1951		37	0.36	86	0.00	37	0.06	38	0.22	71	0.04	40	0.09
Kissin 1993		80	0.21	75	0.00	83	0.03	81	0.03	87	0.03	74	0.03
Kushner 1989		55	0.31	76	0.00	75	0.04	68	0.04	83	0.03	68	0.03
Luisada 1991		35	0.37	22	0.00	44	0.04	45	0.10	82	0.03	47	0.05
Lushtak 2004		32	0.38	20	0.00	27	0.07	24	0.41	83	0.03	36	0.11
Malcuzynski 1961		46	0.34	53	0.00	53	0.06	46	0.06	77	0.03	58	0.04
Magaloff 1978		10	0.49	43	0.00	13	0.20	10	0.65	35	0.29	13	0.43
Magin 1975		19	0.43	87	0.00	32	0.09	35	0.29	72	0.04	32	0.11
Michalowski 1933		83	0.19	33	0.00	59	0.04	62	0.04	69	0.03	73	0.03
Milkina 1970		40	0.35	66	0.00	52	0.05	56	0.05	84	0.03	57	0.04
Mohovich 1999		18	0.43	37	0.00	28	0.07	31	0.35	58	0.04	30	0.12
Moravec 1969		12	0.47	54	0.00	11	0.22	11	0.59	28	0.35	10	0.45
Morozova 2008		76	0.24	32	0.00	80	0.03	73	0.03	80	0.03	75	0.03
Neighaus 1950		49	0.32	34	0.00	40	0.06	39	0.20	45	0.09	27	0.13
Niedzielski 1931		41	0.35	12	0.01	14	0.13	18	0.51	7	0.46	9	0.48
Ohlsson 1999		53	0.32	58	0.00	61	0.04	69	0.04	81	0.03	72	0.03
Osinska 1989		54	0.31	68	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	80	0.03	65	0.03
Pachmann 1927		78	0.24	44	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	61	0.04	71	0.03
Paderewski 1930		88	0.14	69	0.00	87	0.02	84	0.02	74	0.03	84	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		79	0.21	64	0.00	82	0.03	80	0.03	85	0.02	81	0.02
Pierdomenico 2008		81	0.21	88	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	82	0.03	82	0.02
Poblocka 1999		26	0.41	19	0.00	17	0.15	14	0.55	52	0.09	17	0.22
Rabcewiczowa 1932		13	0.46	11	0.01	9	0.17	13	0.56	25	0.34	12	0.44
Rachmaninoff 1923		7	0.56	9	0.01	5	0.37	6	0.77	4	0.73	5	0.75
Rangell 2001		84	0.19	10	0.01	89	0.01	88	0.01	88	0.02	91	0.01
Richter 1976		30	0.39	13	0.01	34	0.08	33	0.31	72	0.03	37	0.10
Rosen 1989		50	0.32	45	0.00	48	0.06	47	0.06	82	0.03	61	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931		4	0.67	4	0.06	3	0.44	4	0.85	4	0.86	4	0.85
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.71	1	0.43	1	0.42	1	0.87	4	0.90	2	0.88
Rosenthal 1931c		2	0.70	2	0.20	2	0.44	3	0.85	4	0.87	3	0.86
Rosenthal 1931d		3	0.69	3	0.15	4	0.68	2	0.87	4	0.90	1	0.88
Rossi 2007		87	0.16	67	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	86	0.02	90	0.01
Rubinstein 1939		77	0.24	89	0.00	79	0.03	79	0.03	82	0.03	67	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		65	0.29	49	0.00	72	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.02	89	0.02
Rubinstein 1966		52	0.32	41	0.00	73	0.03	75	0.03	88	0.02	85	0.02
Schilhawsky 1960		15	0.45	6	0.01	15	0.12	17	0.52	34	0.29	15	0.39
Shebanova 2002		73	0.26	46	0.00	66	0.04	63	0.04	81	0.04	60	0.04
Smith 1975		24	0.41	24	0.00	18	0.18	20	0.49	42	0.22	16	0.33
Sokolov 2002		56	0.31	90	0.00	60	0.04	66	0.04	67	0.03	66	0.03
Sztompka 1959		63	0.30	27	0.00	55	0.05	55	0.05	77	0.04	59	0.04
Tomsic 1995		82	0.21	91	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	85	0.02	83	0.02
Uninsky 1932		71	0.27	55	0.00	74	0.04	72	0.04	80	0.03	76	0.03
Uninsky 1971		38	0.36	60	0.00	36	0.09	36	0.28	77	0.04	33	0.11
Wasowski 1980		62	0.30	39	0.00	68	0.04	70	0.04	82	0.04	52	0.04
Zak 1937		60	0.30	77	0.00	76	0.05	53	0.05	80	0.03	56	0.04
Zak 1951		57	0.31	35	0.00	71	0.04	67	0.04	80	0.03	70	0.03
Average		6	0.56	5	0.02	8	0.24	7	0.73	76	0.04	20	0.17
Random 1		91	-0.05	61	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	27	0.30	48	0.05
Random 2		89	0.04	18	0.00	77	0.03	82	0.03	21	0.31	38	0.10
Random 3		90	-0.01	50	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	33	0.20	62	0.04

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).