Tomsic 1995

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		32	0.88	44	0.00	32	0.11	28	0.11	18	0.36	35	0.20
Bacha 1997		10	0.94	33	0.00	12	0.14	12	0.48	17	0.55	11	0.51
Barbosa 1983		31	0.88	31	0.00	29	0.10	31	0.10	12	0.42	36	0.20
Biret 1990		6	0.94	32	0.00	6	0.19	7	0.51	10	0.60	6	0.55
Block 1995		42	0.81	40	0.00	43	0.06	49	0.06	10	0.56	41	0.18
Brailowsky 1960		15	0.92	48	0.00	17	0.12	19	0.39	7	0.56	18	0.47
Chiu 1999		28	0.88	25	0.00	31	0.08	38	0.08	6	0.58	31	0.22
Clidat 1994		17	0.92	15	0.01	20	0.11	18	0.39	4	0.51	22	0.45
Cohen 1997		41	0.83	20	0.00	40	0.08	39	0.08	32	0.09	51	0.08
Cortot 1951		18	0.92	19	0.00	24	0.12	24	0.31	8	0.59	23	0.43
Csalog 1996		4	0.94	4	0.03	5	0.23	4	0.54	7	0.53	9	0.53
Czerny 1990		25	0.90	45	0.00	23	0.11	16	0.41	8	0.43	24	0.42
Ezaki 2006		21	0.91	13	0.01	25	0.17	23	0.33	3	0.64	20	0.46
Ferenczy 1958		34	0.87	3	0.04	10	0.13	26	0.18	15	0.36	27	0.25
Fliere 1977		22	0.91	21	0.00	22	0.11	20	0.39	4	0.77	5	0.55
Fou 1978		40	0.83	5	0.02	39	0.07	44	0.07	5	0.69	32	0.22
Francois 1956		9	0.94	23	0.00	9	0.14	5	0.52	5	0.60	4	0.56
Grinberg 1951		27	0.88	38	0.00	36	0.09	35	0.09	24	0.41	37	0.19
Hatto 1993		8	0.94	24	0.00	8	0.15	11	0.48	11	0.52	15	0.50
Hatto 1997		7	0.94	49	0.00	7	0.19	9	0.50	11	0.53	12	0.51
Indjic 2001		5	0.94	22	0.00	4	0.17	6	0.52	9	0.55	8	0.53
Jonas 1947		2	0.96	2	0.05	2	0.42	2	0.69	2	0.72	2	0.70
Kapell 1951		13	0.93	17	0.01	15	0.14	14	0.45	15	0.47	21	0.46
Kiepura 1999		39	0.83	46	0.00	41	0.07	42	0.07	10	0.41	43	0.17
Kushner 1989		11	0.94	11	0.01	13	0.16	13	0.46	11	0.55	13	0.50
Luisada 1991		29	0.88	29	0.00	33	0.09	32	0.09	6	0.54	30	0.22
Lushtak 2004		33	0.87	27	0.00	34	0.09	36	0.09	4	0.57	29	0.23
Magaloff 1978		44	0.77	37	0.00	44	0.06	47	0.06	22	0.20	49	0.11
Meguri 1997		3	0.95	9	0.01	3	0.37	3	0.59	3	0.58	3	0.58
Milkina 1970		43	0.81	6	0.01	42	0.12	27	0.12	14	0.42	33	0.22
Mohovich 1999		26	0.89	39	0.00	27	0.09	33	0.09	17	0.39	38	0.19
Niedzielski 1931		24	0.91	52	0.00	16	0.11	15	0.43	12	0.55	16	0.49
Ohlsson 1999		36	0.87	10	0.01	30	0.10	30	0.10	7	0.70	26	0.26
Olejniczak 1990		19	0.92	41	0.00	18	0.11	22	0.38	4	0.58	19	0.47
Osinska 1989		37	0.85	7	0.01	35	0.09	34	0.09	7	0.68	28	0.25
Rangell 2001		47	0.70	16	0.01	47	0.07	45	0.07	21	0.30	48	0.14
Richter 1976		38	0.84	42	0.00	38	0.09	37	0.09	20	0.33	44	0.17
Rubinstein 1938		46	0.72	47	0.00	45	0.05	50	0.05	8	0.51	46	0.16
Rubinstein 1952		45	0.74	36	0.00	46	0.07	41	0.07	16	0.44	42	0.18
Rubinstein 1961		48	0.68	26	0.00	48	0.06	48	0.06	10	0.63	39	0.19
Rubinstein 1966		49	0.67	12	0.01	49	0.06	46	0.06	12	0.60	40	0.19
Shebanova 2002		23	0.91	30	0.00	21	0.12	21	0.38	6	0.57	17	0.47
Smidowicz 1948		12	0.93	14	0.01	11	0.13	8	0.51	12	0.53	10	0.52
Smidowicz 1948b		14	0.93	35	0.00	14	0.16	10	0.49	15	0.52	14	0.50
Smith 1975		50	0.65	18	0.00	50	0.07	43	0.07	28	0.14	50	0.10
Sofronitsky 1949		35	0.87	43	0.00	37	0.10	29	0.10	25	0.26	45	0.16
Sztompka 1959		30	0.88	34	0.00	28	0.08	40	0.08	9	0.56	34	0.21
Tomsic 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1971		20	0.91	28	0.00	26	0.13	25	0.24	13	0.42	25	0.32
Wasowski 1980		16	0.92	8	0.01	19	0.11	17	0.40	3	0.69	7	0.53
Average Tempo		1	0.97	1	0.70	1	0.69	1	0.84	2	0.79	1	0.81
Random 1		51	0.07	53	0.00	51	0.04	51	0.04	4	0.46	47	0.14
Random 2		53	-0.02	50	0.00	53	0.02	53	0.02	30	0.06	53	0.03
Random 3		52	0.03	51	0.00	52	0.03	52	0.03	33	0.07	52	0.05

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).