Fou 1978

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
Ashkenazy 1981		21	0.89	37	0.00	26	0.10	27	0.10	35	0.09	33	0.09
Bacha 1997		46	0.82	27	0.00	46	0.06	42	0.06	43	0.06	43	0.06
Barbosa 1983		4	0.94	7	0.03	3	0.28	3	0.67	8	0.47	5	0.56
Biret 1990		48	0.82	42	0.00	47	0.04	49	0.04	46	0.06	51	0.05
Block 1995		33	0.87	25	0.00	32	0.07	38	0.07	14	0.34	18	0.15
Brailowsky 1960		30	0.88	29	0.00	31	0.09	30	0.09	31	0.09	32	0.09
Chiu 1999		12	0.91	8	0.02	21	0.10	23	0.22	46	0.05	30	0.10
Clidat 1994		16	0.90	22	0.00	10	0.14	14	0.36	49	0.04	24	0.12
Cohen 1997		11	0.91	23	0.00	13	0.11	12	0.38	43	0.06	20	0.15
Cortot 1951		49	0.81	46	0.00	48	0.05	46	0.05	46	0.05	52	0.05
Csalog 1996		37	0.86	24	0.00	43	0.09	32	0.09	45	0.06	42	0.07
Czerny 1990		17	0.90	2	0.08	8	0.17	8	0.51	25	0.17	12	0.29
Ezaki 2006		3	0.94	3	0.06	4	0.25	5	0.58	12	0.34	8	0.44
Ferenczy 1958		7	0.92	20	0.01	11	0.10	9	0.48	29	0.10	13	0.22
Fliere 1977		8	0.92	32	0.00	18	0.08	21	0.24	37	0.07	23	0.13
Fou 1978		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Francois 1956		41	0.85	49	0.00	45	0.09	31	0.09	32	0.09	35	0.09
Grinberg 1951		40	0.85	26	0.00	39	0.06	44	0.06	46	0.06	45	0.06
Hatto 1993		34	0.87	50	0.00	33	0.08	34	0.08	48	0.05	48	0.06
Hatto 1997		35	0.86	44	0.00	36	0.06	43	0.06	48	0.05	49	0.05
Indjic 2001		36	0.86	47	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.07	48	0.05	47	0.06
Jonas 1947		28	0.88	17	0.01	23	0.09	22	0.23	44	0.06	25	0.12
Kapell 1951		27	0.88	12	0.02	17	0.08	24	0.22	45	0.06	27	0.11
Kiepura 1999		10	0.91	48	0.00	7	0.20	10	0.47	2	0.60	6	0.53
Kushner 1989		47	0.82	40	0.00	49	0.07	39	0.07	49	0.04	50	0.05
Luisada 1991		32	0.87	45	0.00	35	0.05	47	0.05	41	0.07	44	0.06
Lushtak 2004		25	0.89	9	0.02	25	0.09	25	0.16	45	0.04	36	0.08
Magaloff 1978		19	0.90	10	0.02	12	0.10	11	0.42	9	0.44	9	0.43
Meguri 1997		39	0.85	34	0.00	44	0.09	33	0.09	34	0.10	34	0.09
Milkina 1970		9	0.91	28	0.00	20	0.08	18	0.27	18	0.32	11	0.29
Mohovich 1999		31	0.88	30	0.00	14	0.10	15	0.30	33	0.08	19	0.15
Niedzielski 1931		44	0.84	39	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.07	35	0.07	37	0.07
Ohlsson 1999		15	0.90	31	0.00	28	0.08	36	0.08	36	0.06	40	0.07
Olejniczak 1990		18	0.90	33	0.00	19	0.09	20	0.25	35	0.08	22	0.14
Osinska 1989		5	0.94	11	0.02	5	0.20	4	0.61	7	0.57	3	0.59
Rangell 2001		38	0.85	15	0.01	38	0.04	48	0.04	10	0.39	26	0.12
Richter 1976		6	0.93	4	0.06	6	0.27	6	0.56	8	0.45	7	0.50
Rubinstein 1938		45	0.83	18	0.01	34	0.06	41	0.06	23	0.22	28	0.11
Rubinstein 1952		14	0.91	6	0.03	9	0.11	7	0.53	1	0.64	4	0.58
Rubinstein 1961		42	0.84	16	0.01	40	0.06	45	0.06	5	0.61	15	0.19
Rubinstein 1966		43	0.84	21	0.01	41	0.08	35	0.08	5	0.59	14	0.22
Shebanova 2002		2	0.95	5	0.05	2	0.21	2	0.71	6	0.57	2	0.64
Smidowicz 1948		22	0.89	41	0.00	29	0.09	29	0.09	49	0.05	39	0.07
Smidowicz 1948b		24	0.89	35	0.00	30	0.11	26	0.11	49	0.05	38	0.07
Smith 1975		26	0.89	43	0.00	24	0.14	19	0.26	3	0.63	10	0.40
Sofronitsky 1949		29	0.88	38	0.00	15	0.10	17	0.28	41	0.07	21	0.14
Sztompka 1959		1	0.97	1	0.47	1	0.46	1	0.77	1	0.72	1	0.74
Tomsic 1995		23	0.89	14	0.01	22	0.10	16	0.30	31	0.09	17	0.16
Uninsky 1971		20	0.89	19	0.01	27	0.10	28	0.10	47	0.05	41	0.07
Wasowski 1980		13	0.91	13	0.01	16	0.10	13	0.37	28	0.09	16	0.18
Random 1		51	0.00	51	0.00	51	0.02	51	0.02	20	0.16	46	0.06
Random 2		52	-0.02	36	0.00	52	0.02	52	0.02	5	0.46	29	0.10
Random 3		50	0.05	52	0.00	50	0.03	50	0.03	11	0.34	31	0.10

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).