Francois 1956

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		4	0.67	57	0.00	4	0.13	9	0.53	4	0.54	8	0.53
Anderszewski 2003		70	0.36	43	0.00	56	0.03	66	0.03	36	0.19	57	0.08
Ashkenazy 1981		66	0.39	67	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	54	0.05	74	0.04
Bacha 2000		72	0.34	76	0.00	82	0.03	75	0.03	61	0.04	76	0.03
Badura 1965		64	0.40	47	0.00	67	0.03	65	0.03	71	0.04	83	0.03
Barbosa 1983		27	0.54	28	0.00	28	0.07	27	0.27	20	0.43	21	0.34
Biret 1990		21	0.56	7	0.02	26	0.09	18	0.38	5	0.57	12	0.47
Blet 2003		46	0.49	54	0.00	45	0.05	51	0.05	47	0.06	61	0.05
Block 1995		58	0.42	64	0.00	79	0.03	74	0.03	52	0.04	84	0.03
Blumental 1952		81	0.21	61	0.00	69	0.05	53	0.05	61	0.04	73	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		67	0.38	22	0.00	72	0.03	64	0.03	57	0.04	85	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		56	0.43	69	0.00	80	0.03	76	0.03	55	0.04	78	0.03
Bunin 1987		22	0.56	13	0.01	33	0.05	31	0.24	31	0.23	33	0.23
Bunin 1987b		23	0.56	50	0.00	35	0.07	32	0.23	31	0.23	32	0.23
Chiu 1999		71	0.35	81	0.00	62	0.04	61	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04
Cohen 1997		79	0.28	10	0.01	55	0.03	67	0.03	29	0.26	53	0.09
Cortot 1951		47	0.49	5	0.02	41	0.07	36	0.16	15	0.37	31	0.24
Csalog 1996		55	0.43	60	0.00	52	0.06	45	0.06	41	0.16	48	0.10
Czerny 1949		1	0.75	1	0.46	1	0.45	1	0.76	1	0.83	1	0.79
Czerny 1990		14	0.62	70	0.00	24	0.10	21	0.35	24	0.25	28	0.30
Duchoud 2007		41	0.51	65	0.00	54	0.04	56	0.04	58	0.05	72	0.04
Ezaki 2006		5	0.66	17	0.01	6	0.15	4	0.59	8	0.55	5	0.57
Falvay 1989		10	0.64	12	0.01	7	0.17	3	0.63	5	0.55	3	0.59
Farrell 1958		50	0.47	14	0.01	51	0.05	48	0.05	21	0.33	45	0.13
Ferenczy 1958		39	0.51	23	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.09	18	0.39	36	0.19
Fliere 1977		28	0.54	73	0.00	47	0.05	52	0.05	63	0.04	64	0.04
Fou 1978		49	0.48	26	0.00	16	0.09	25	0.31	31	0.28	29	0.29
Francois 1956		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1923		86	0.09	84	0.00	74	0.03	73	0.03	56	0.06	75	0.04
Friedman 1923b		84	0.10	85	0.00	73	0.03	71	0.03	46	0.07	62	0.05
Friedman 1930		74	0.32	62	0.00	58	0.03	63	0.03	31	0.28	52	0.09
Garcia 2007		85	0.09	86	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.02	88	0.02
Garcia 2007b		87	0.04	87	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	72	0.03	90	0.02
Gierzod 1998		40	0.51	77	0.00	31	0.07	34	0.17	22	0.24	35	0.20
Gornostaeva 1994		2	0.71	2	0.19	2	0.31	6	0.56	7	0.60	4	0.58
Groot 1988		3	0.70	19	0.01	8	0.10	5	0.56	10	0.48	9	0.52
Harasiewicz 1955		42	0.51	31	0.00	17	0.09	14	0.44	25	0.26	22	0.34
Hatto 1993		83	0.17	71	0.00	84	0.04	57	0.04	84	0.03	87	0.03
Hatto 1997		76	0.29	42	0.00	53	0.04	54	0.04	58	0.04	70	0.04
Horowitz 1949		44	0.50	18	0.01	21	0.08	26	0.28	21	0.33	27	0.30
Indjic 1988		82	0.19	78	0.00	83	0.04	55	0.04	72	0.03	82	0.03
Kapell 1951		8	0.64	15	0.01	20	0.10	15	0.42	24	0.42	15	0.42
Kissin 1993		38	0.52	30	0.00	38	0.07	40	0.15	39	0.19	39	0.17
Kushner 1989		36	0.52	55	0.00	50	0.05	47	0.05	36	0.17	50	0.09
Luisada 1991		63	0.40	44	0.00	59	0.04	60	0.04	54	0.05	63	0.04
Lushtak 2004		52	0.46	63	0.00	36	0.08	30	0.25	35	0.18	34	0.21
Malcuzynski 1961		7	0.65	88	0.00	9	0.09	10	0.50	17	0.40	13	0.45
Magaloff 1978		19	0.58	29	0.00	27	0.08	23	0.33	33	0.18	30	0.24
Magin 1975		75	0.32	45	0.00	61	0.03	69	0.03	53	0.05	67	0.04
Michalowski 1933		78	0.28	68	0.00	77	0.03	82	0.03	62	0.04	81	0.03
Milkina 1970		18	0.58	27	0.00	29	0.06	29	0.27	19	0.36	25	0.31
Mohovich 1999		13	0.63	39	0.00	13	0.09	12	0.49	13	0.49	11	0.49
Moravec 1969		6	0.65	21	0.00	22	0.10	20	0.37	9	0.47	14	0.42
Morozova 2008		53	0.45	51	0.00	34	0.05	35	0.16	28	0.19	41	0.17
Neighaus 1950		12	0.63	3	0.05	3	0.14	2	0.66	11	0.56	2	0.61
Niedzielski 1931		51	0.46	49	0.00	66	0.03	81	0.03	46	0.06	66	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		24	0.55	25	0.00	32	0.07	37	0.16	35	0.19	38	0.17
Osinska 1989		11	0.63	24	0.00	19	0.13	8	0.55	6	0.59	6	0.57
Pachmann 1927		65	0.40	74	0.00	64	0.03	80	0.03	47	0.06	69	0.04
Paderewski 1930		48	0.48	32	0.00	65	0.03	78	0.03	53	0.05	68	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		35	0.53	75	0.00	39	0.07	38	0.16	32	0.21	37	0.18
Pierdomenico 2008		60	0.41	37	0.00	60	0.03	68	0.03	30	0.21	55	0.08
Poblocka 1999		32	0.53	41	0.00	40	0.05	39	0.15	43	0.13	44	0.14
Rabcewiczowa 1932		17	0.60	8	0.02	11	0.08	11	0.50	6	0.66	7	0.57
Rachmaninoff 1923		26	0.55	66	0.00	25	0.09	22	0.33	23	0.34	24	0.33
Rangell 2001		62	0.40	58	0.00	81	0.03	77	0.03	68	0.03	86	0.03
Richter 1976		68	0.38	52	0.00	71	0.03	79	0.03	85	0.03	80	0.03
Rosen 1989		30	0.53	11	0.01	12	0.08	19	0.38	18	0.42	19	0.40
Rosenthal 1930		33	0.53	59	0.00	48	0.05	49	0.05	24	0.43	43	0.15
Rosenthal 1931		69	0.37	79	0.00	75	0.02	85	0.02	20	0.36	56	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		73	0.34	36	0.00	76	0.03	72	0.03	24	0.33	49	0.10
Rosenthal 1931c		31	0.53	35	0.00	30	0.07	33	0.21	11	0.54	23	0.34
Rosenthal 1931d		59	0.42	34	0.00	63	0.04	59	0.04	14	0.38	46	0.12
Rossi 2007		77	0.28	56	0.00	78	0.02	83	0.02	18	0.32	54	0.08
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.24	48	0.00	85	0.02	84	0.02	58	0.04	79	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		25	0.55	4	0.02	37	0.06	42	0.13	30	0.21	42	0.17
Rubinstein 1966		43	0.50	40	0.00	49	0.05	50	0.05	34	0.25	47	0.11
Schilhawsky 1960		37	0.52	38	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.15	36	0.20	40	0.17
Shebanova 2002		61	0.41	33	0.00	70	0.03	70	0.03	65	0.05	71	0.04
Smith 1975		9	0.64	6	0.02	5	0.12	7	0.55	11	0.46	10	0.50
Sokolov 2002		16	0.61	46	0.00	18	0.10	16	0.42	20	0.38	18	0.40
Sztompka 1959		45	0.50	89	0.00	46	0.06	46	0.06	43	0.13	51	0.09
Tomsic 1995		15	0.62	9	0.01	10	0.08	13	0.47	13	0.38	16	0.42
Uninsky 1932		54	0.43	72	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.10	55	0.05	58	0.07
Uninsky 1971		29	0.54	20	0.00	23	0.10	28	0.27	29	0.35	26	0.31
Wasowski 1980		57	0.42	90	0.00	68	0.04	58	0.04	80	0.03	77	0.03
Zak 1937		34	0.53	82	0.00	15	0.11	24	0.32	19	0.39	20	0.35
Zak 1951		20	0.56	16	0.01	14	0.10	17	0.39	16	0.43	17	0.41
Random 1		90	-0.08	83	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	74	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		89	0.00	80	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	33	0.18	59	0.06
Random 3		88	0.00	53	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	24	0.31	60	0.06

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).