Blet 2003

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