Gornostaeva 1994

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		16	0.64	19	0.01	14	0.11	18	0.40	15	0.43	16	0.41
Anderszewski 2003		49	0.49	23	0.00	54	0.04	65	0.04	27	0.25	49	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		57	0.46	68	0.00	66	0.04	54	0.04	73	0.04	76	0.04
Bacha 2000		68	0.43	56	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	65	0.04	77	0.03
Badura 1965		67	0.44	82	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	28	0.27	51	0.10
Barbosa 1983		63	0.44	83	0.00	53	0.03	69	0.03	43	0.11	60	0.06
Biret 1990		17	0.63	10	0.02	17	0.07	20	0.35	22	0.42	22	0.38
Blet 2003		55	0.48	37	0.00	62	0.04	61	0.04	41	0.13	55	0.07
Block 1995		20	0.60	49	0.00	26	0.08	24	0.32	11	0.44	21	0.38
Blumental 1952		81	0.27	45	0.00	84	0.03	75	0.03	71	0.04	85	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		19	0.61	27	0.00	19	0.08	19	0.39	15	0.52	13	0.45
Brailowsky 1960		29	0.57	47	0.00	33	0.07	37	0.17	29	0.26	39	0.21
Bunin 1987		40	0.53	57	0.00	51	0.04	55	0.04	49	0.06	68	0.05
Bunin 1987b		39	0.53	51	0.00	52	0.07	45	0.07	50	0.06	58	0.06
Chiu 1999		73	0.41	43	0.00	59	0.05	50	0.05	45	0.06	64	0.05
Cohen 1997		77	0.33	7	0.04	20	0.07	43	0.12	33	0.20	44	0.15
Cortot 1951		48	0.50	39	0.00	45	0.04	60	0.04	37	0.19	53	0.09
Csalog 1996		72	0.41	53	0.00	79	0.03	76	0.03	53	0.06	73	0.04
Czerny 1949		9	0.69	6	0.05	5	0.14	6	0.61	8	0.66	4	0.63
Czerny 1990		18	0.61	32	0.00	37	0.07	34	0.21	26	0.25	36	0.23
Duchoud 2007		37	0.54	38	0.00	46	0.05	46	0.05	36	0.20	50	0.10
Ezaki 2006		7	0.71	12	0.01	9	0.19	5	0.61	9	0.52	8	0.56
Falvay 1989		25	0.58	30	0.00	31	0.08	28	0.26	26	0.23	34	0.24
Farrell 1958		38	0.54	59	0.00	21	0.05	33	0.22	23	0.33	30	0.27
Ferenczy 1958		66	0.44	52	0.00	78	0.03	70	0.03	46	0.07	67	0.05
Fliere 1977		15	0.66	25	0.00	22	0.09	17	0.41	25	0.28	24	0.34
Fou 1978		32	0.55	35	0.00	16	0.08	14	0.42	24	0.38	18	0.40
Francois 1956		6	0.71	1	0.22	1	0.22	7	0.60	6	0.56	7	0.58
Friedman 1923		86	0.16	88	0.00	80	0.03	78	0.03	36	0.14	62	0.06
Friedman 1923b		87	0.16	84	0.00	81	0.03	80	0.03	39	0.12	61	0.06
Friedman 1930		76	0.36	31	0.00	63	0.04	51	0.04	30	0.29	47	0.11
Garcia 2007		82	0.22	78	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	79	0.03	84	0.03
Garcia 2007b		85	0.19	89	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	79	0.02	90	0.02
Gierzod 1998		24	0.58	50	0.00	36	0.08	32	0.23	23	0.24	35	0.23
Gornostaeva 1994		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Groot 1988		11	0.68	17	0.01	10	0.15	12	0.50	11	0.48	12	0.49
Harasiewicz 1955		41	0.53	18	0.01	11	0.13	13	0.44	11	0.39	17	0.41
Hatto 1993		83	0.22	74	0.00	82	0.02	83	0.02	81	0.03	89	0.02
Hatto 1997		79	0.31	60	0.00	72	0.03	73	0.03	79	0.03	82	0.03
Horowitz 1949		53	0.48	64	0.00	60	0.04	53	0.04	60	0.04	71	0.04
Indjic 1988		84	0.21	85	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	81	0.03	87	0.02
Kapell 1951		45	0.51	86	0.00	70	0.04	64	0.04	54	0.05	69	0.04
Kissin 1993		30	0.57	48	0.00	30	0.06	31	0.24	30	0.30	31	0.27
Kushner 1989		10	0.68	79	0.00	25	0.06	29	0.26	13	0.42	26	0.33
Luisada 1991		42	0.53	66	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	49	0.06	63	0.05
Lushtak 2004		59	0.45	61	0.00	49	0.04	56	0.04	67	0.04	75	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		4	0.72	13	0.01	6	0.16	9	0.58	11	0.47	11	0.52
Magaloff 1978		2	0.72	5	0.05	7	0.18	8	0.58	6	0.47	10	0.52
Magin 1975		43	0.53	54	0.00	41	0.06	42	0.14	24	0.25	41	0.19
Michalowski 1933		78	0.32	58	0.00	69	0.03	72	0.03	53	0.05	72	0.04
Milkina 1970		28	0.57	75	0.00	35	0.07	23	0.33	26	0.32	28	0.32
Mohovich 1999		13	0.67	9	0.02	12	0.15	11	0.51	9	0.56	9	0.53
Moravec 1969		52	0.49	29	0.00	67	0.04	59	0.04	38	0.12	54	0.07
Morozova 2008		34	0.54	34	0.00	32	0.10	22	0.33	17	0.32	29	0.32
Neighaus 1950		8	0.69	3	0.12	3	0.19	4	0.66	4	0.60	5	0.63
Niedzielski 1931		74	0.39	80	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	74	0.03	86	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		22	0.59	14	0.01	23	0.07	35	0.19	43	0.12	43	0.15
Osinska 1989		3	0.72	8	0.04	8	0.19	2	0.70	2	0.78	2	0.74
Pachmann 1927		75	0.37	87	0.00	55	0.03	71	0.03	44	0.10	66	0.05
Paderewski 1930		51	0.49	69	0.00	71	0.05	49	0.05	49	0.05	65	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		35	0.54	40	0.00	28	0.06	26	0.28	20	0.41	25	0.34
Pierdomenico 2008		46	0.51	62	0.00	47	0.04	63	0.04	24	0.24	48	0.10
Poblocka 1999		33	0.54	42	0.00	68	0.03	68	0.03	58	0.04	79	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		12	0.67	20	0.01	13	0.10	10	0.54	3	0.72	6	0.62
Rachmaninoff 1923		54	0.48	41	0.00	38	0.05	38	0.17	29	0.26	40	0.21
Rangell 2001		21	0.59	44	0.00	18	0.06	15	0.42	14	0.39	19	0.40
Richter 1976		70	0.43	67	0.00	73	0.02	85	0.02	54	0.04	80	0.03
Rosen 1989		1	0.73	2	0.18	2	0.23	1	0.76	2	0.75	1	0.75
Rosenthal 1930		26	0.58	26	0.00	34	0.06	27	0.27	8	0.57	20	0.39
Rosenthal 1931		56	0.46	76	0.00	42	0.08	40	0.14	11	0.53	32	0.27
Rosenthal 1931b		62	0.44	70	0.00	48	0.05	47	0.05	14	0.46	45	0.15
Rosenthal 1931c		27	0.58	81	0.00	27	0.07	21	0.33	9	0.61	14	0.45
Rosenthal 1931d		50	0.49	21	0.00	50	0.04	52	0.04	15	0.38	46	0.12
Rossi 2007		58	0.46	24	0.00	40	0.06	41	0.14	6	0.48	33	0.26
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.30	22	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.10	29	0.28	42	0.17
Rubinstein 1952		44	0.52	16	0.01	43	0.06	39	0.16	24	0.31	38	0.22
Rubinstein 1966		36	0.54	36	0.00	39	0.05	30	0.24	7	0.51	23	0.35
Schilhawsky 1960		64	0.44	71	0.00	75	0.03	77	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03
Shebanova 2002		60	0.44	33	0.00	74	0.03	81	0.03	70	0.04	83	0.03
Smith 1975		5	0.71	4	0.08	4	0.23	3	0.68	2	0.63	3	0.65
Sokolov 2002		14	0.66	11	0.02	15	0.08	16	0.42	12	0.42	15	0.42
Sztompka 1959		47	0.51	46	0.00	64	0.05	48	0.05	38	0.17	52	0.09
Tomsic 1995		23	0.59	28	0.00	29	0.08	25	0.31	17	0.35	27	0.33
Uninsky 1932		71	0.42	55	0.00	65	0.04	58	0.04	51	0.05	74	0.04
Uninsky 1971		31	0.55	15	0.01	24	0.07	36	0.18	36	0.26	37	0.22
Wasowski 1980		61	0.44	65	0.00	76	0.03	74	0.03	63	0.04	78	0.03
Zak 1937		69	0.43	72	0.00	58	0.04	66	0.04	66	0.04	70	0.04
Zak 1951		65	0.44	73	0.00	56	0.04	57	0.04	45	0.08	59	0.06
Random 1		90	-0.02	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	49	0.04	88	0.02
Random 2		89	0.00	77	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	27	0.22	56	0.07
Random 3		88	0.04	63	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	31	0.24	57	0.07

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).