Bunin 1987b

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		40	0.41	30	0.00	39	0.06	37	0.25	76	0.03	39	0.09
Anderszewski 2003		25	0.44	31	0.00	27	0.12	24	0.39	62	0.04	32	0.12
Ashkenazy 1981		20	0.46	32	0.00	25	0.13	14	0.47	50	0.07	11	0.18
Bacha 2000		62	0.34	6	0.00	65	0.05	55	0.05	81	0.03	52	0.04
Badura 1965		15	0.47	33	0.00	6	0.14	11	0.48	28	0.36	5	0.42
Barbosa 1983		54	0.36	34	0.00	60	0.04	70	0.04	47	0.06	50	0.05
Biret 1990		74	0.32	35	0.00	69	0.05	54	0.05	70	0.04	71	0.04
Blet 2003		60	0.35	36	0.00	67	0.04	67	0.04	73	0.03	85	0.03
Block 1995		59	0.35	13	0.00	52	0.04	61	0.04	73	0.04	65	0.04
Blumental 1952		66	0.33	37	0.00	62	0.04	75	0.04	81	0.04	67	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		8	0.53	14	0.00	8	0.18	6	0.53	43	0.11	9	0.24
Brailowsky 1960		78	0.29	38	0.00	82	0.03	81	0.03	73	0.04	76	0.03
Bunin 1987		1	0.99	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Bunin 1987b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Chiu 1999		56	0.35	39	0.00	44	0.07	44	0.13	69	0.04	45	0.07
Cohen 1997		87	0.20	8	0.00	75	0.04	71	0.04	63	0.04	69	0.04
Cortot 1951		67	0.33	40	0.00	55	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.04	72	0.04
Csalog 1996		58	0.35	15	0.00	57	0.04	72	0.04	72	0.04	63	0.04
Czerny 1949		2	0.56	41	0.00	5	0.23	4	0.55	37	0.29	6	0.40
Czerny 1990		49	0.37	42	0.00	63	0.04	59	0.04	87	0.03	88	0.03
Duchoud 2007		52	0.36	43	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.16	46	0.06	36	0.10
Ezaki 2006		35	0.43	7	0.00	36	0.06	35	0.26	83	0.03	38	0.09
Falvay 1989		75	0.31	44	0.00	77	0.03	86	0.03	72	0.04	78	0.03
Farrell 1958		80	0.29	45	0.00	78	0.02	88	0.02	78	0.04	82	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		34	0.43	46	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.17	56	0.04	44	0.08
Fliere 1977		11	0.49	47	0.00	16	0.09	13	0.48	71	0.04	17	0.14
Fou 1978		64	0.34	48	0.00	73	0.04	58	0.04	76	0.04	58	0.04
Francois 1956		61	0.35	16	0.00	70	0.05	51	0.05	82	0.03	74	0.04
Friedman 1923		72	0.32	49	0.00	46	0.06	47	0.06	60	0.05	51	0.05
Friedman 1923b		69	0.33	50	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.12	70	0.04	46	0.07
Friedman 1930		51	0.36	17	0.00	33	0.07	34	0.28	47	0.07	21	0.14
Garcia 2007		47	0.38	51	0.00	59	0.03	77	0.03	74	0.04	87	0.03
Garcia 2007b		39	0.42	9	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.16	54	0.05	41	0.09
Gierzod 1998		16	0.46	52	0.00	28	0.08	29	0.37	86	0.03	34	0.11
Gornostaeva 1994		36	0.42	53	0.00	32	0.07	32	0.30	73	0.03	40	0.09
Groot 1988		28	0.43	3	0.00	11	0.07	31	0.33	47	0.06	23	0.14
Harasiewicz 1955		21	0.46	54	0.00	21	0.07	15	0.46	72	0.04	25	0.14
Hatto 1993		29	0.43	18	0.00	31	0.17	22	0.40	51	0.06	16	0.15
Hatto 1997		32	0.43	55	0.00	30	0.12	25	0.39	59	0.05	22	0.14
Horowitz 1949		7	0.53	56	0.00	9	0.11	7	0.50	21	0.48	3	0.49
Indjic 1988		30	0.43	19	0.00	29	0.09	23	0.40	69	0.04	27	0.13
Kapell 1951		9	0.52	20	0.00	14	0.07	16	0.46	67	0.04	19	0.14
Kissin 1993		41	0.40	57	0.00	50	0.06	46	0.06	82	0.03	62	0.04
Kushner 1989		33	0.43	58	0.00	40	0.06	40	0.19	81	0.03	43	0.08
Luisada 1991		42	0.40	59	0.00	51	0.05	52	0.05	81	0.03	53	0.04
Lushtak 2004		24	0.45	21	0.00	24	0.10	30	0.35	64	0.05	29	0.13
Malcuzynski 1961		19	0.46	22	0.00	12	0.07	18	0.45	50	0.05	13	0.15
Magaloff 1978		70	0.33	60	0.00	71	0.05	57	0.05	69	0.04	55	0.04
Magin 1975		18	0.46	4	0.00	13	0.09	19	0.43	71	0.04	26	0.13
Michalowski 1933		46	0.39	61	0.00	22	0.08	27	0.38	34	0.25	7	0.31
Milkina 1970		45	0.39	11	0.00	56	0.04	68	0.04	86	0.03	83	0.03
Mohovich 1999		48	0.38	23	0.00	54	0.04	66	0.04	78	0.04	68	0.04
Moravec 1969		81	0.28	62	0.00	72	0.04	62	0.04	74	0.03	75	0.03
Morozova 2008		27	0.43	63	0.00	35	0.08	36	0.25	65	0.04	35	0.10
Neighaus 1950		17	0.46	64	0.00	23	0.08	21	0.40	50	0.05	24	0.14
Niedzielski 1931		55	0.35	65	0.00	48	0.05	50	0.05	83	0.03	56	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		23	0.45	66	0.00	10	0.10	9	0.50	69	0.04	20	0.14
Osinska 1989		38	0.42	24	0.00	47	0.05	53	0.05	81	0.03	54	0.04
Pachmann 1927		50	0.37	67	0.00	64	0.05	56	0.05	49	0.06	49	0.05
Paderewski 1930		65	0.34	10	0.00	68	0.05	49	0.05	53	0.04	60	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		31	0.43	68	0.00	38	0.06	39	0.23	49	0.06	30	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		83	0.27	69	0.00	84	0.03	85	0.03	86	0.03	80	0.03
Poblocka 1999		14	0.48	70	0.00	18	0.07	20	0.41	57	0.05	18	0.14
Rabcewiczowa 1932		53	0.36	71	0.00	58	0.04	73	0.04	71	0.04	57	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		43	0.40	72	0.00	34	0.07	33	0.29	80	0.04	33	0.11
Rangell 2001		71	0.33	73	0.00	53	0.04	64	0.04	71	0.04	70	0.04
Richter 1976		5	0.54	74	0.00	3	0.20	5	0.53	16	0.53	2	0.53
Rosen 1989		63	0.34	75	0.00	66	0.04	60	0.04	77	0.04	66	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		57	0.35	76	0.00	61	0.04	63	0.04	58	0.04	64	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		85	0.23	25	0.00	86	0.03	84	0.03	84	0.03	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		84	0.25	26	0.00	85	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.03	90	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		76	0.30	77	0.00	74	0.04	74	0.04	67	0.04	73	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		86	0.23	2	0.00	87	0.04	76	0.04	85	0.02	89	0.03
Rossi 2007		88	0.17	27	0.00	88	0.03	82	0.03	81	0.04	77	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		68	0.33	28	0.00	79	0.03	87	0.03	67	0.04	81	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		77	0.29	78	0.00	81	0.03	80	0.03	84	0.03	91	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		82	0.28	79	0.00	83	0.04	65	0.04	87	0.03	86	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		4	0.54	80	0.00	2	0.26	3	0.57	29	0.41	4	0.48
Shebanova 2002		13	0.48	5	0.00	17	0.10	12	0.48	64	0.05	15	0.15
Smith 1975		79	0.29	81	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	68	0.04	79	0.03
Sokolov 2002		37	0.42	82	0.00	26	0.11	28	0.38	45	0.08	12	0.17
Sztompka 1959		44	0.39	83	0.00	49	0.05	48	0.05	83	0.03	61	0.04
Tomsic 1995		73	0.32	12	0.00	80	0.03	83	0.03	62	0.06	59	0.04
Uninsky 1932		22	0.45	84	0.00	20	0.06	26	0.39	51	0.06	14	0.15
Uninsky 1971		6	0.53	85	0.00	7	0.20	8	0.50	42	0.16	8	0.28
Wasowski 1980		26	0.44	86	0.00	37	0.06	38	0.23	87	0.03	42	0.08
Zak 1937		12	0.49	87	0.00	19	0.08	17	0.45	48	0.07	10	0.18
Zak 1951		10	0.50	88	0.00	15	0.08	10	0.48	85	0.03	31	0.12
Average		3	0.55	89	0.00	4	0.18	2	0.58	82	0.03	28	0.13
Random 1		91	-0.02	90	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	9	0.47	37	0.10
Random 2		90	-0.01	29	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	21	0.31	47	0.06
Random 3		89	-0.01	91	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	12	0.34	48	0.06

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).