Bacha 2000

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

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).