Uninsky 1971

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		42	0.46	29	0.00	52	0.05	62	0.05	17	0.43	44	0.15
Anderszewski 2003		29	0.49	24	0.00	22	0.16	22	0.50	35	0.32	23	0.40
Ashkenazy 1981		71	0.36	46	0.00	79	0.04	73	0.04	65	0.03	88	0.03
Bacha 2000		61	0.39	23	0.00	37	0.07	42	0.17	8	0.51	33	0.29
Badura 1965		58	0.40	39	0.00	59	0.06	50	0.06	29	0.27	48	0.13
Barbosa 1983		8	0.56	5	0.04	3	0.19	4	0.72	15	0.60	3	0.66
Biret 1990		28	0.49	47	0.00	20	0.11	21	0.50	35	0.29	26	0.38
Blet 2003		72	0.36	69	0.00	76	0.04	69	0.04	67	0.03	85	0.03
Block 1995		53	0.42	9	0.01	48	0.06	49	0.06	36	0.23	51	0.12
Blumental 1952		10	0.54	40	0.00	10	0.17	12	0.59	17	0.57	9	0.58
Boshniakovich 1969		32	0.48	19	0.00	16	0.12	17	0.52	30	0.28	25	0.38
Brailowsky 1960		31	0.49	55	0.00	32	0.09	35	0.35	24	0.48	21	0.41
Bunin 1987		65	0.37	83	0.00	66	0.06	55	0.06	63	0.04	69	0.05
Bunin 1987b		69	0.37	60	0.00	55	0.06	52	0.06	53	0.06	64	0.06
Chiu 1999		56	0.41	52	0.00	46	0.06	56	0.06	20	0.35	45	0.14
Cohen 1997		55	0.41	71	0.00	58	0.07	47	0.07	9	0.46	40	0.18
Cortot 1951		63	0.38	84	0.00	60	0.07	46	0.07	13	0.55	38	0.20
Csalog 1996		68	0.37	17	0.01	72	0.04	74	0.04	71	0.04	75	0.04
Czerny 1949		15	0.54	27	0.00	23	0.11	19	0.52	28	0.51	16	0.51
Czerny 1990		2	0.62	7	0.02	2	0.28	2	0.83	9	0.76	1	0.79
Duchoud 2007		87	0.22	64	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	68	0.04	87	0.03
Ezaki 2006		20	0.52	87	0.00	31	0.07	33	0.35	48	0.07	42	0.16
Falvay 1989		26	0.50	79	0.00	33	0.08	27	0.38	50	0.05	46	0.14
Farrell 1958		52	0.43	31	0.00	41	0.08	38	0.27	27	0.40	29	0.33
Ferenczy 1958		39	0.46	38	0.00	51	0.07	48	0.07	25	0.44	39	0.18
Fliere 1977		7	0.56	21	0.00	12	0.15	13	0.59	35	0.31	18	0.43
Fou 1978		34	0.48	44	0.00	30	0.07	30	0.37	32	0.25	32	0.30
Francois 1956		70	0.37	42	0.00	70	0.05	63	0.05	47	0.06	72	0.05
Friedman 1923		77	0.30	76	0.00	77	0.04	79	0.04	62	0.05	81	0.04
Friedman 1923b		78	0.30	77	0.00	75	0.04	71	0.04	49	0.06	70	0.05
Friedman 1930		82	0.26	58	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	67	0.04	86	0.03
Garcia 2007		81	0.26	49	0.00	81	0.03	81	0.03	55	0.05	76	0.04
Garcia 2007b		62	0.39	59	0.00	47	0.06	53	0.06	44	0.11	62	0.08
Gierzod 1998		3	0.61	13	0.01	4	0.23	3	0.76	18	0.52	4	0.63
Gornostaeva 1994		51	0.43	22	0.00	64	0.05	67	0.05	60	0.04	78	0.04
Groot 1988		25	0.50	43	0.00	11	0.11	16	0.53	12	0.50	17	0.51
Harasiewicz 1955		5	0.57	6	0.03	9	0.16	6	0.66	28	0.49	11	0.57
Hatto 1993		18	0.53	3	0.05	6	0.32	8	0.63	12	0.55	8	0.59
Hatto 1997		17	0.53	41	0.00	8	0.28	10	0.62	14	0.52	10	0.57
Horowitz 1949		76	0.32	75	0.00	78	0.04	76	0.04	37	0.18	61	0.08
Indjic 1988		14	0.54	8	0.02	7	0.30	7	0.63	13	0.55	7	0.59
Kapell 1951		23	0.51	32	0.00	36	0.07	37	0.30	39	0.20	35	0.24
Kissin 1993		19	0.52	34	0.00	18	0.10	20	0.51	19	0.54	14	0.52
Kushner 1989		36	0.48	80	0.00	29	0.07	34	0.35	56	0.05	47	0.13
Luisada 1991		48	0.45	36	0.00	57	0.05	57	0.05	33	0.25	52	0.11
Lushtak 2004		43	0.45	18	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.26	48	0.06	50	0.12
Malcuzynski 1961		33	0.48	26	0.00	34	0.09	28	0.38	53	0.06	43	0.15
Magaloff 1978		16	0.53	10	0.01	21	0.12	15	0.54	9	0.57	12	0.55
Magin 1975		60	0.40	33	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	64	0.04	74	0.04
Michalowski 1933		88	0.18	88	0.00	88	0.03	82	0.03	51	0.04	83	0.03
Milkina 1970		4	0.59	2	0.09	5	0.27	5	0.70	19	0.50	6	0.59
Mohovich 1999		35	0.48	20	0.00	39	0.07	39	0.27	48	0.06	49	0.13
Moravec 1969		24	0.50	30	0.00	25	0.10	24	0.44	26	0.38	20	0.41
Morozova 2008		50	0.43	65	0.00	53	0.05	65	0.05	47	0.08	66	0.06
Neighaus 1950		59	0.40	54	0.00	67	0.04	78	0.04	27	0.32	56	0.11
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.34	70	0.00	61	0.05	60	0.05	31	0.24	53	0.11
Ohlsson 1999		46	0.45	72	0.00	28	0.07	29	0.37	19	0.44	22	0.40
Osinska 1989		11	0.54	35	0.00	19	0.11	14	0.54	42	0.20	28	0.33
Pachmann 1927		85	0.23	68	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	69	0.03	82	0.03
Paderewski 1930		84	0.24	50	0.00	69	0.04	75	0.04	26	0.31	54	0.11
Perlemuter 1992		66	0.37	56	0.00	74	0.05	64	0.05	43	0.13	60	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		74	0.35	78	0.00	62	0.04	68	0.04	63	0.04	73	0.04
Poblocka 1999		22	0.51	11	0.01	27	0.07	31	0.36	44	0.14	36	0.22
Rabcewiczowa 1932		54	0.41	62	0.00	45	0.08	44	0.16	59	0.05	59	0.09
Rachmaninoff 1923		41	0.46	12	0.01	26	0.08	26	0.40	22	0.44	19	0.42
Rangell 2001		57	0.41	89	0.00	68	0.05	61	0.05	63	0.06	71	0.05
Richter 1976		9	0.55	4	0.04	14	0.12	23	0.48	14	0.60	13	0.54
Rosen 1989		27	0.50	85	0.00	40	0.07	36	0.31	24	0.36	31	0.33
Rosenthal 1930		73	0.36	90	0.00	71	0.04	77	0.04	36	0.28	55	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.26	74	0.00	84	0.03	87	0.03	59	0.04	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.25	81	0.00	83	0.03	86	0.03	52	0.05	79	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		79	0.30	86	0.00	82	0.03	84	0.03	64	0.05	80	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		86	0.23	91	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	65	0.04	89	0.03
Rossi 2007		67	0.37	45	0.00	73	0.04	70	0.04	43	0.11	63	0.07
Rubinstein 1939		47	0.45	57	0.00	54	0.05	58	0.05	48	0.05	68	0.05
Rubinstein 1952		21	0.52	16	0.01	24	0.09	25	0.43	41	0.19	34	0.29
Rubinstein 1966		12	0.54	82	0.00	17	0.11	18	0.52	39	0.27	27	0.37
Schilhawsky 1960		30	0.49	37	0.00	38	0.08	41	0.25	25	0.44	30	0.33
Shebanova 2002		38	0.47	61	0.00	43	0.07	43	0.16	32	0.27	37	0.21
Smith 1975		44	0.45	25	0.00	56	0.05	59	0.05	45	0.16	58	0.09
Sokolov 2002		64	0.38	28	0.00	63	0.05	66	0.05	50	0.06	67	0.05
Sztompka 1959		13	0.54	15	0.01	15	0.11	11	0.59	11	0.63	5	0.61
Tomsic 1995		45	0.45	51	0.00	50	0.06	54	0.06	39	0.18	57	0.10
Uninsky 1932		6	0.56	14	0.01	13	0.12	9	0.62	3	0.74	2	0.68
Uninsky 1971		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Wasowski 1980		37	0.48	48	0.00	35	0.08	32	0.36	27	0.40	24	0.38
Zak 1937		40	0.46	66	0.00	44	0.07	45	0.15	40	0.19	41	0.17
Zak 1951		49	0.43	67	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	46	0.06	65	0.06
Average		1	0.68	1	0.56	1	0.55	1	0.86	36	0.31	15	0.52
Random 1		90	-0.06	53	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	48	0.04	91	0.02
Random 2		89	0.00	73	0.00	90	0.01	89	0.01	46	0.05	90	0.02
Random 3		91	-0.08	63	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	41	0.14	77	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).