Rabcewiczowa 1932

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		17	0.57	82	0.00	34	0.07	27	0.28	42	0.14	39	0.20
Anderszewski 2003		58	0.48	83	0.00	67	0.03	79	0.03	63	0.04	86	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		54	0.49	33	0.00	51	0.04	64	0.04	53	0.06	65	0.05
Bacha 2000		59	0.48	57	0.00	63	0.05	57	0.05	33	0.21	47	0.10
Badura 1965		80	0.42	21	0.01	74	0.03	88	0.03	77	0.04	88	0.03
Barbosa 1983		77	0.42	63	0.00	28	0.05	33	0.21	29	0.41	28	0.29
Biret 1990		5	0.65	20	0.01	5	0.14	5	0.56	12	0.49	5	0.52
Blet 2003		74	0.44	49	0.00	64	0.04	60	0.04	35	0.19	52	0.09
Block 1995		75	0.43	24	0.00	62	0.04	59	0.04	67	0.04	76	0.04
Blumental 1952		2	0.67	2	0.12	2	0.26	6	0.53	6	0.52	4	0.52
Boshniakovich 1969		67	0.46	87	0.00	75	0.03	84	0.03	84	0.03	89	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		62	0.48	50	0.00	69	0.04	68	0.04	39	0.23	48	0.10
Bunin 1987		86	0.37	37	0.00	85	0.04	73	0.04	65	0.04	77	0.04
Bunin 1987b		87	0.36	59	0.00	86	0.04	71	0.04	73	0.04	70	0.04
Chiu 1999		42	0.52	64	0.00	39	0.06	41	0.15	19	0.34	33	0.23
Cohen 1997		79	0.42	89	0.00	68	0.04	76	0.04	18	0.38	44	0.12
Cortot 1951		78	0.42	88	0.00	81	0.03	80	0.03	49	0.05	81	0.04
Csalog 1996		57	0.48	39	0.00	52	0.04	63	0.04	24	0.36	43	0.12
Czerny 1949		51	0.50	44	0.00	61	0.08	46	0.08	67	0.04	60	0.06
Czerny 1990		9	0.60	51	0.00	9	0.13	10	0.49	30	0.37	12	0.43
Duchoud 2007		85	0.37	69	0.00	84	0.04	75	0.04	59	0.05	75	0.04
Ezaki 2006		45	0.52	35	0.00	48	0.04	62	0.04	61	0.04	67	0.04
Falvay 1989		28	0.55	27	0.00	18	0.08	20	0.32	25	0.45	19	0.38
Farrell 1958		19	0.56	79	0.00	17	0.12	14	0.42	19	0.45	11	0.43
Ferenczy 1958		73	0.44	41	0.00	76	0.03	85	0.03	61	0.04	87	0.03
Fliere 1977		13	0.58	38	0.00	14	0.10	9	0.51	40	0.18	26	0.30
Fou 1978		8	0.61	42	0.00	10	0.13	7	0.53	12	0.52	3	0.52
Francois 1956		43	0.52	45	0.00	31	0.06	35	0.20	13	0.54	25	0.33
Friedman 1923		81	0.40	80	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	57	0.05	83	0.04
Friedman 1923b		82	0.40	84	0.00	82	0.03	87	0.03	51	0.06	78	0.04
Friedman 1930		66	0.47	47	0.00	77	0.03	86	0.03	56	0.05	73	0.04
Garcia 2007		26	0.56	62	0.00	46	0.05	53	0.05	14	0.51	40	0.16
Garcia 2007b		20	0.56	30	0.00	32	0.07	19	0.33	24	0.41	20	0.37
Gierzod 1998		25	0.56	46	0.00	27	0.06	18	0.35	53	0.06	41	0.14
Gornostaeva 1994		35	0.54	36	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.16	20	0.41	32	0.26
Groot 1988		68	0.46	53	0.00	26	0.06	42	0.12	63	0.05	56	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		48	0.51	17	0.01	49	0.05	55	0.05	69	0.04	82	0.04
Hatto 1993		63	0.47	40	0.00	56	0.05	50	0.05	77	0.03	80	0.04
Hatto 1997		61	0.48	65	0.00	59	0.07	47	0.07	80	0.03	63	0.05
Horowitz 1949		83	0.39	19	0.01	87	0.03	78	0.03	78	0.04	85	0.03
Indjic 1988		60	0.48	60	0.00	58	0.06	49	0.06	73	0.04	62	0.05
Kapell 1951		4	0.65	7	0.04	4	0.12	3	0.62	16	0.41	7	0.50
Kissin 1993		30	0.55	34	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.18	46	0.07	46	0.11
Kushner 1989		3	0.65	6	0.04	3	0.17	2	0.70	9	0.63	1	0.66
Luisada 1991		53	0.49	73	0.00	54	0.04	67	0.04	58	0.05	68	0.04
Lushtak 2004		24	0.56	54	0.00	16	0.11	16	0.40	21	0.44	13	0.42
Malcuzynski 1961		71	0.44	13	0.01	70	0.04	72	0.04	74	0.03	84	0.03
Magaloff 1978		14	0.58	74	0.00	30	0.06	31	0.24	17	0.37	27	0.30
Magin 1975		36	0.54	14	0.01	19	0.08	15	0.41	30	0.31	21	0.36
Michalowski 1933		49	0.51	4	0.04	44	0.05	43	0.11	23	0.36	37	0.20
Milkina 1970		10	0.59	70	0.00	25	0.06	26	0.28	45	0.15	35	0.20
Mohovich 1999		47	0.51	81	0.00	53	0.05	52	0.05	52	0.06	64	0.05
Moravec 1969		7	0.61	29	0.00	13	0.07	12	0.44	14	0.57	6	0.50
Morozova 2008		27	0.56	31	0.00	33	0.06	30	0.26	34	0.28	29	0.27
Neighaus 1950		56	0.48	55	0.00	72	0.04	70	0.04	46	0.07	66	0.05
Niedzielski 1931		55	0.49	71	0.00	57	0.05	54	0.05	34	0.21	50	0.10
Ohlsson 1999		65	0.47	58	0.00	66	0.04	74	0.04	74	0.04	72	0.04
Osinska 1989		29	0.55	75	0.00	40	0.07	39	0.17	49	0.07	45	0.11
Pachmann 1927		50	0.50	12	0.01	71	0.03	81	0.03	4	0.59	42	0.13
Paderewski 1930		40	0.53	9	0.02	45	0.04	45	0.08	11	0.52	36	0.20
Perlemuter 1992		23	0.56	10	0.02	20	0.08	22	0.30	11	0.52	17	0.39
Pierdomenico 2008		84	0.38	68	0.00	80	0.04	58	0.04	43	0.18	53	0.08
Poblocka 1999		39	0.53	56	0.00	41	0.07	38	0.17	53	0.05	51	0.09
Rabcewiczowa 1932		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rachmaninoff 1923		15	0.57	3	0.04	7	0.14	13	0.44	16	0.39	15	0.41
Rangell 2001		72	0.44	25	0.00	73	0.04	69	0.04	54	0.05	79	0.04
Richter 1976		88	0.34	76	0.00	88	0.04	66	0.04	77	0.04	71	0.04
Rosen 1989		37	0.54	90	0.00	36	0.06	28	0.27	38	0.19	34	0.23
Rosenthal 1930		31	0.55	28	0.00	24	0.09	32	0.21	10	0.57	24	0.35
Rosenthal 1931		21	0.56	23	0.01	23	0.08	24	0.29	11	0.57	16	0.41
Rosenthal 1931b		32	0.55	22	0.01	22	0.08	23	0.30	12	0.59	14	0.42
Rosenthal 1931c		18	0.57	5	0.04	15	0.11	17	0.39	11	0.59	9	0.48
Rosenthal 1931d		38	0.53	15	0.01	21	0.06	29	0.26	12	0.60	18	0.39
Rossi 2007		69	0.46	67	0.00	79	0.04	77	0.04	44	0.13	57	0.07
Rubinstein 1939		33	0.55	26	0.00	29	0.06	21	0.31	18	0.39	22	0.35
Rubinstein 1952		12	0.59	43	0.00	6	0.18	11	0.48	20	0.46	10	0.47
Rubinstein 1966		34	0.54	77	0.00	35	0.06	36	0.19	40	0.22	38	0.20
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.53	48	0.00	43	0.05	44	0.10	49	0.07	55	0.08
Shebanova 2002		11	0.59	18	0.01	11	0.13	8	0.52	37	0.24	23	0.35
Smith 1975		64	0.47	85	0.00	60	0.06	48	0.06	43	0.16	49	0.10
Sokolov 2002		70	0.46	72	0.00	65	0.04	61	0.04	54	0.05	69	0.04
Sztompka 1959		6	0.63	8	0.02	8	0.14	4	0.61	26	0.50	2	0.55
Tomsic 1995		76	0.42	61	0.00	78	0.03	82	0.03	37	0.21	54	0.08
Uninsky 1932		16	0.57	16	0.01	37	0.06	34	0.21	32	0.36	30	0.27
Uninsky 1971		52	0.50	32	0.00	55	0.05	51	0.05	62	0.05	61	0.05
Wasowski 1980		22	0.56	11	0.01	12	0.09	25	0.29	37	0.23	31	0.26
Zak 1937		44	0.52	91	0.00	50	0.04	65	0.04	47	0.08	58	0.06
Zak 1951		46	0.52	66	0.00	47	0.05	56	0.05	47	0.07	59	0.06
Average		1	0.72	1	0.42	1	0.42	1	0.78	31	0.32	8	0.50
Random 1		91	-0.11	86	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	46	0.05	90	0.02
Random 2		89	0.00	52	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	39	0.10	74	0.04
Random 3		90	-0.10	78	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	78	0.03	91	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).