Rossi 2007

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		33	0.37	31	0.00	47	0.05	54	0.05	50	0.05	52	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		60	0.28	57	0.00	54	0.05	52	0.05	78	0.03	60	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		47	0.33	36	0.00	67	0.06	46	0.06	52	0.04	53	0.05
Bacha 2000		52	0.32	84	0.00	56	0.04	67	0.04	80	0.03	70	0.03
Badura 1965		67	0.25	44	0.00	61	0.04	63	0.04	70	0.03	79	0.03
Barbosa 1983		66	0.26	62	0.00	55	0.05	61	0.05	80	0.03	59	0.04
Biret 1990		53	0.31	49	0.00	42	0.05	38	0.15	69	0.04	41	0.08
Blet 2003		54	0.31	50	0.00	64	0.05	58	0.05	80	0.03	61	0.04
Block 1995		80	0.19	24	0.00	38	0.05	44	0.10	78	0.04	49	0.06
Blumental 1952		69	0.25	85	0.00	76	0.04	66	0.04	72	0.04	67	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		22	0.39	56	0.00	24	0.08	22	0.40	65	0.04	29	0.13
Brailowsky 1960		88	0.07	86	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.01	89	0.01
Bunin 1987		49	0.33	69	0.00	52	0.06	48	0.06	57	0.05	54	0.05
Bunin 1987b		46	0.34	40	0.00	51	0.05	53	0.05	65	0.04	56	0.04
Chiu 1999		27	0.38	52	0.00	35	0.09	31	0.26	65	0.05	32	0.11
Cohen 1997		32	0.37	32	0.00	26	0.06	33	0.23	22	0.27	10	0.25
Cortot 1951		82	0.18	64	0.00	79	0.02	85	0.02	63	0.04	84	0.03
Csalog 1996		26	0.38	13	0.01	10	0.14	11	0.48	45	0.11	12	0.23
Czerny 1949		11	0.42	29	0.00	22	0.10	12	0.47	47	0.08	15	0.19
Czerny 1990		45	0.34	25	0.00	53	0.05	60	0.05	67	0.04	68	0.04
Duchoud 2007		41	0.34	26	0.00	37	0.06	36	0.19	27	0.44	9	0.29
Ezaki 2006		30	0.37	21	0.00	31	0.08	28	0.29	68	0.05	30	0.12
Falvay 1989		24	0.39	8	0.02	13	0.10	20	0.41	78	0.04	25	0.13
Farrell 1958		37	0.36	12	0.01	8	0.10	8	0.53	39	0.24	7	0.36
Ferenczy 1958		61	0.27	70	0.00	73	0.03	77	0.03	70	0.04	78	0.03
Fliere 1977		15	0.42	79	0.00	18	0.09	21	0.40	71	0.05	22	0.14
Fou 1978		16	0.41	17	0.01	14	0.09	24	0.35	58	0.05	26	0.13
Francois 1956		50	0.33	16	0.01	40	0.04	41	0.12	54	0.05	42	0.08
Friedman 1923		84	0.17	82	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	83	0.03	86	0.03
Friedman 1923b		83	0.18	75	0.00	82	0.03	74	0.03	84	0.03	80	0.03
Friedman 1930		76	0.22	63	0.00	77	0.05	56	0.05	69	0.04	62	0.04
Garcia 2007		2	0.50	1	0.33	1	0.33	1	0.71	2	0.74	1	0.72
Garcia 2007b		3	0.50	2	0.26	2	0.38	2	0.70	12	0.58	2	0.64
Gierzod 1998		5	0.48	41	0.00	5	0.09	6	0.54	65	0.04	21	0.15
Gornostaeva 1994		17	0.41	47	0.00	30	0.07	27	0.30	61	0.04	35	0.11
Groot 1988		75	0.22	87	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.03	82	0.03
Harasiewicz 1955		35	0.37	55	0.00	32	0.06	34	0.23	61	0.05	36	0.11
Hatto 1993		72	0.24	66	0.00	65	0.05	59	0.05	64	0.04	69	0.04
Hatto 1997		64	0.27	76	0.00	57	0.04	68	0.04	62	0.04	63	0.04
Horowitz 1949		87	0.10	71	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02
Indjic 1988		65	0.26	53	0.00	60	0.04	69	0.04	63	0.04	58	0.04
Kapell 1951		8	0.43	34	0.00	7	0.10	7	0.54	45	0.11	11	0.24
Kissin 1993		25	0.38	58	0.00	34	0.07	26	0.32	52	0.08	19	0.16
Kushner 1989		23	0.39	20	0.01	28	0.07	23	0.39	75	0.04	31	0.12
Luisada 1991		62	0.27	88	0.00	75	0.04	73	0.04	68	0.04	55	0.04
Lushtak 2004		63	0.27	54	0.00	58	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.04	65	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		12	0.42	9	0.02	9	0.13	10	0.50	57	0.06	17	0.17
Magaloff 1978		57	0.30	35	0.00	69	0.04	64	0.04	86	0.02	74	0.03
Magin 1975		28	0.38	65	0.00	39	0.05	37	0.15	87	0.03	43	0.07
Michalowski 1933		68	0.25	18	0.01	62	0.04	65	0.04	28	0.26	38	0.10
Milkina 1970		18	0.41	28	0.00	27	0.07	14	0.45	71	0.04	27	0.13
Mohovich 1999		56	0.30	48	0.00	43	0.04	45	0.10	53	0.05	46	0.07
Moravec 1969		55	0.30	80	0.00	72	0.03	82	0.03	80	0.03	71	0.03
Morozova 2008		39	0.35	72	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.12	68	0.05	40	0.08
Neighaus 1950		70	0.24	61	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	77	0.03	83	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		59	0.28	11	0.01	25	0.07	39	0.14	44	0.09	33	0.11
Ohlsson 1999		48	0.33	15	0.01	21	0.08	29	0.29	71	0.04	34	0.11
Osinska 1989		9	0.43	23	0.00	15	0.09	13	0.47	60	0.06	16	0.17
Pachmann 1927		43	0.34	22	0.00	49	0.06	49	0.06	34	0.30	28	0.13
Paderewski 1930		29	0.38	7	0.03	16	0.08	25	0.33	6	0.59	5	0.44
Perlemuter 1992		13	0.42	6	0.03	17	0.07	17	0.44	22	0.40	6	0.42
Pierdomenico 2008		4	0.49	5	0.03	4	0.13	4	0.55	4	0.65	3	0.60
Poblocka 1999		81	0.18	30	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	83	0.03	72	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		34	0.37	73	0.00	33	0.07	30	0.27	68	0.04	37	0.10
Rachmaninoff 1923		85	0.16	33	0.00	68	0.04	70	0.04	80	0.03	75	0.03
Rangell 2001		6	0.44	27	0.00	6	0.11	5	0.54	23	0.44	4	0.49
Richter 1976		40	0.35	81	0.00	50	0.06	47	0.06	79	0.03	57	0.04
Rosen 1989		20	0.40	39	0.00	46	0.05	57	0.05	73	0.04	66	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		86	0.16	77	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	89	0.01	90	0.01
Rosenthal 1931		78	0.21	89	0.00	85	0.04	72	0.04	78	0.03	77	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		74	0.22	74	0.00	84	0.03	79	0.03	80	0.03	85	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		71	0.24	90	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	85	0.02	88	0.02
Rosenthal 1931d		77	0.21	91	0.00	70	0.03	76	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03
Rossi 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rubinstein 1939		44	0.34	38	0.00	29	0.07	35	0.21	73	0.03	39	0.08
Rubinstein 1952		14	0.42	3	0.05	12	0.14	9	0.51	67	0.04	24	0.14
Rubinstein 1966		10	0.42	42	0.00	23	0.10	15	0.45	61	0.05	20	0.15
Schilhawsky 1960		36	0.36	67	0.00	48	0.06	50	0.06	57	0.04	51	0.05
Shebanova 2002		51	0.32	59	0.00	66	0.05	62	0.05	82	0.03	64	0.04
Smith 1975		79	0.20	45	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03	76	0.03
Sokolov 2002		73	0.23	46	0.00	59	0.05	55	0.05	86	0.02	73	0.03
Sztompka 1959		38	0.35	51	0.00	44	0.04	42	0.11	72	0.04	44	0.07
Tomsic 1995		7	0.44	4	0.04	11	0.13	19	0.42	33	0.25	8	0.32
Uninsky 1932		42	0.34	37	0.00	36	0.08	32	0.24	37	0.23	13	0.23
Uninsky 1971		31	0.37	60	0.00	45	0.05	43	0.11	70	0.04	45	0.07
Wasowski 1980		58	0.29	83	0.00	63	0.05	51	0.05	60	0.06	50	0.05
Zak 1937		19	0.41	43	0.00	20	0.09	18	0.44	47	0.06	18	0.16
Zak 1951		21	0.40	19	0.01	19	0.07	16	0.44	43	0.09	14	0.20
Average		1	0.51	10	0.02	3	0.28	3	0.67	88	0.03	23	0.14
Random 1		91	-0.17	78	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01	91	0.01
Random 2		90	-0.04	68	0.00	90	0.02	87	0.02	34	0.18	48	0.06
Random 3		89	-0.02	14	0.01	87	0.02	88	0.02	23	0.28	47	0.07

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).