Richter 1976

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		12	0.62	20	0.00	17	0.10	26	0.48	45	0.12	20	0.24
Anderszewski 2003		23	0.54	23	0.00	33	0.11	29	0.43	55	0.04	39	0.13
Ashkenazy 1981		29	0.52	14	0.01	26	0.10	28	0.45	40	0.18	19	0.28
Bacha 2000		81	0.27	77	0.00	79	0.04	72	0.04	65	0.04	58	0.04
Badura 1965		13	0.60	67	0.00	18	0.11	24	0.49	17	0.47	13	0.48
Barbosa 1983		65	0.38	32	0.00	68	0.05	61	0.05	72	0.04	64	0.04
Biret 1990		64	0.39	73	0.00	61	0.04	71	0.04	50	0.05	71	0.04
Blet 2003		48	0.47	25	0.00	56	0.05	56	0.05	58	0.05	54	0.05
Block 1995		28	0.52	78	0.00	36	0.08	39	0.25	45	0.08	37	0.14
Blumental 1952		78	0.30	60	0.00	70	0.04	75	0.04	87	0.03	83	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		4	0.69	6	0.05	5	0.34	4	0.67	16	0.56	4	0.61
Brailowsky 1960		66	0.38	84	0.00	72	0.04	73	0.04	51	0.06	50	0.05
Bunin 1987		20	0.55	87	0.00	11	0.13	17	0.53	7	0.53	11	0.53
Bunin 1987b		24	0.54	65	0.00	10	0.13	16	0.53	5	0.53	9	0.53
Chiu 1999		71	0.37	53	0.00	67	0.04	76	0.04	79	0.03	77	0.03
Cohen 1997		88	0.14	88	0.00	88	0.03	83	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.03
Cortot 1951		39	0.50	16	0.00	23	0.09	35	0.35	20	0.47	14	0.41
Csalog 1996		75	0.33	42	0.00	74	0.04	67	0.04	64	0.04	65	0.04
Czerny 1949		9	0.64	19	0.00	6	0.21	10	0.60	23	0.49	8	0.54
Czerny 1990		47	0.47	33	0.00	55	0.06	48	0.06	80	0.03	69	0.04
Duchoud 2007		63	0.40	50	0.00	42	0.08	42	0.20	31	0.21	25	0.20
Ezaki 2006		19	0.57	31	0.00	32	0.09	34	0.37	56	0.06	33	0.15
Falvay 1989		80	0.29	40	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	75	0.03	89	0.02
Farrell 1958		62	0.41	46	0.00	66	0.06	50	0.06	73	0.04	52	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		55	0.45	37	0.00	63	0.04	78	0.04	74	0.03	82	0.03
Fliere 1977		8	0.64	36	0.00	9	0.23	9	0.61	46	0.08	22	0.22
Fou 1978		34	0.50	58	0.00	41	0.08	41	0.22	67	0.04	45	0.09
Francois 1956		77	0.31	74	0.00	80	0.04	68	0.04	70	0.04	74	0.04
Friedman 1923		42	0.49	38	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.18	45	0.11	38	0.14
Friedman 1923b		40	0.49	9	0.02	40	0.12	36	0.33	40	0.17	21	0.24
Friedman 1930		45	0.47	18	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.14	49	0.06	46	0.09
Garcia 2007		57	0.44	70	0.00	52	0.06	53	0.06	73	0.04	56	0.05
Garcia 2007b		52	0.45	66	0.00	46	0.10	46	0.10	81	0.03	57	0.05
Gierzod 1998		16	0.59	43	0.00	20	0.12	20	0.51	50	0.06	29	0.17
Gornostaeva 1994		56	0.44	71	0.00	54	0.05	54	0.05	62	0.03	68	0.04
Groot 1988		60	0.41	28	0.00	51	0.05	58	0.05	72	0.04	72	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		5	0.68	5	0.06	4	0.22	5	0.67	25	0.50	5	0.58
Hatto 1993		36	0.50	89	0.00	27	0.12	13	0.55	62	0.05	30	0.17
Hatto 1997		31	0.51	85	0.00	29	0.13	15	0.54	62	0.05	32	0.16
Horowitz 1949		15	0.60	79	0.00	14	0.14	18	0.52	9	0.54	10	0.53
Indjic 1988		32	0.51	44	0.00	28	0.09	14	0.54	52	0.05	31	0.16
Kapell 1951		25	0.54	12	0.01	15	0.12	12	0.57	46	0.08	24	0.21
Kissin 1993		6	0.67	11	0.02	7	0.17	8	0.63	27	0.47	7	0.54
Kushner 1989		30	0.52	35	0.00	38	0.08	40	0.23	76	0.03	48	0.08
Luisada 1991		38	0.50	48	0.00	47	0.06	49	0.06	68	0.04	49	0.05
Lushtak 2004		44	0.47	17	0.00	43	0.08	44	0.16	65	0.05	47	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		21	0.55	7	0.04	13	0.12	21	0.50	26	0.28	15	0.37
Magaloff 1978		73	0.35	80	0.00	75	0.04	66	0.04	87	0.02	78	0.03
Magin 1975		17	0.59	30	0.00	22	0.09	25	0.49	57	0.04	35	0.14
Michalowski 1933		37	0.50	75	0.00	25	0.08	23	0.49	12	0.48	12	0.48
Milkina 1970		46	0.47	34	0.00	50	0.07	47	0.07	85	0.03	53	0.05
Mohovich 1999		61	0.41	54	0.00	62	0.04	63	0.04	86	0.03	84	0.03
Moravec 1969		82	0.27	61	0.00	84	0.02	88	0.02	68	0.04	75	0.03
Morozova 2008		14	0.60	15	0.01	19	0.12	27	0.46	39	0.22	18	0.32
Neighaus 1950		18	0.57	41	0.00	21	0.11	19	0.52	31	0.27	16	0.37
Niedzielski 1931		49	0.46	81	0.00	53	0.06	52	0.06	82	0.03	61	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		33	0.51	62	0.00	24	0.10	22	0.50	48	0.06	28	0.17
Osinska 1989		43	0.48	55	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	77	0.03	59	0.04
Pachmann 1927		50	0.46	63	0.00	65	0.05	62	0.05	36	0.22	43	0.10
Paderewski 1930		68	0.37	57	0.00	69	0.03	79	0.03	68	0.04	80	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		58	0.44	86	0.00	64	0.04	74	0.04	86	0.03	76	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		76	0.33	76	0.00	78	0.04	69	0.04	54	0.06	51	0.05
Poblocka 1999		2	0.70	2	0.11	2	0.21	2	0.68	9	0.57	3	0.62
Rabcewiczowa 1932		74	0.34	45	0.00	77	0.04	77	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		41	0.49	49	0.00	37	0.08	37	0.32	64	0.04	41	0.11
Rangell 2001		67	0.37	24	0.00	58	0.05	60	0.05	74	0.04	70	0.04
Richter 1976		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosen 1989		54	0.45	21	0.00	59	0.05	57	0.05	82	0.03	66	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		53	0.45	64	0.00	48	0.05	59	0.05	33	0.26	42	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.25	59	0.00	82	0.03	82	0.03	88	0.02	90	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		85	0.24	82	0.00	85	0.02	89	0.02	72	0.04	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		83	0.26	90	0.00	81	0.03	81	0.03	74	0.03	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		87	0.21	83	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	79	0.03	91	0.02
Rossi 2007		86	0.23	72	0.00	87	0.02	85	0.02	84	0.03	88	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		69	0.37	68	0.00	73	0.04	64	0.04	80	0.03	79	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		79	0.30	22	0.00	60	0.04	70	0.04	72	0.04	73	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		70	0.37	56	0.00	71	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.04	81	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		1	0.72	1	0.40	1	0.39	6	0.66	4	0.62	2	0.64
Shebanova 2002		27	0.53	69	0.00	34	0.10	31	0.42	65	0.05	36	0.14
Smith 1975		59	0.43	10	0.02	57	0.05	55	0.05	76	0.03	60	0.04
Sokolov 2002		51	0.46	29	0.00	35	0.14	33	0.41	42	0.11	23	0.21
Sztompka 1959		11	0.62	8	0.03	16	0.13	7	0.64	42	0.18	17	0.34
Tomsic 1995		72	0.36	13	0.01	76	0.04	65	0.04	75	0.05	63	0.04
Uninsky 1932		10	0.64	39	0.00	12	0.12	11	0.58	11	0.54	6	0.56
Uninsky 1971		3	0.70	4	0.07	3	0.19	3	0.68	4	0.64	1	0.66
Wasowski 1980		35	0.50	47	0.00	39	0.09	38	0.30	81	0.04	40	0.11
Zak 1937		22	0.55	51	0.00	30	0.08	32	0.42	46	0.08	26	0.18
Zak 1951		26	0.54	26	0.00	31	0.08	30	0.42	46	0.07	27	0.17
Average		7	0.65	3	0.08	8	0.19	1	0.78	74	0.03	34	0.15
Random 1		89	-0.01	52	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	3	0.54	44	0.10
Random 2		90	-0.07	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	24	0.27	55	0.05
Random 3		91	-0.07	27	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	30	0.20	67	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).