Hatto 1997

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		41	0.37	23	0.00	25	0.08	33	0.20	23	0.25	28	0.22
Anderszewski 2003		4	0.60	42	0.00	3	0.28	5	0.55	1	0.63	3	0.59
Ashkenazy 1981		3	0.61	70	0.00	4	0.26	3	0.64	8	0.54	4	0.59
Bacha 2000		20	0.46	24	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.09	23	0.40	30	0.19
Badura 1965		79	0.23	56	0.00	69	0.04	64	0.04	55	0.04	73	0.04
Barbosa 1983		35	0.38	35	0.00	21	0.10	19	0.37	28	0.38	16	0.37
Biret 1990		8	0.55	5	0.01	9	0.16	9	0.49	4	0.63	5	0.56
Blet 2003		14	0.49	18	0.00	15	0.07	18	0.43	24	0.34	15	0.38
Block 1995		86	0.11	61	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	84	0.02	88	0.02
Blumental 1952		27	0.42	57	0.00	27	0.11	23	0.32	16	0.35	21	0.33
Boshniakovich 1969		83	0.22	52	0.00	82	0.04	66	0.04	86	0.02	83	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		56	0.33	62	0.00	74	0.04	57	0.04	39	0.11	55	0.07
Bunin 1987		12	0.50	13	0.00	18	0.12	14	0.45	21	0.36	12	0.40
Bunin 1987b		11	0.50	25	0.00	17	0.10	13	0.45	21	0.37	11	0.41
Chiu 1999		36	0.38	27	0.00	29	0.08	29	0.23	33	0.24	27	0.23
Cohen 1997		59	0.32	79	0.00	66	0.03	75	0.03	25	0.32	42	0.10
Cortot 1951		55	0.33	71	0.00	40	0.05	37	0.13	64	0.04	61	0.07
Csalog 1996		66	0.30	28	0.00	67	0.03	77	0.03	31	0.28	45	0.09
Czerny 1949		58	0.32	32	0.00	45	0.05	48	0.05	41	0.13	51	0.08
Czerny 1990		43	0.36	63	0.00	42	0.05	43	0.09	50	0.06	59	0.07
Duchoud 2007		6	0.58	26	0.00	5	0.18	8	0.52	9	0.49	8	0.50
Ezaki 2006		18	0.46	64	0.00	19	0.08	10	0.46	22	0.33	13	0.39
Falvay 1989		29	0.41	4	0.01	39	0.06	38	0.12	36	0.14	37	0.13
Farrell 1958		31	0.40	72	0.00	37	0.05	40	0.11	63	0.04	56	0.07
Ferenczy 1958		30	0.41	43	0.00	23	0.07	27	0.26	20	0.38	23	0.31
Fliere 1977		32	0.39	58	0.00	47	0.05	50	0.05	66	0.04	67	0.04
Fou 1978		33	0.39	29	0.00	57	0.04	63	0.04	48	0.07	64	0.05
Francois 1956		68	0.29	36	0.00	51	0.04	58	0.04	54	0.04	76	0.04
Friedman 1923		81	0.23	59	0.00	86	0.03	80	0.03	75	0.04	87	0.03
Friedman 1923b		80	0.23	73	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	61	0.05	74	0.04
Friedman 1930		60	0.31	15	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.09	50	0.05	58	0.07
Garcia 2007		85	0.19	8	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	69	0.03	82	0.03
Garcia 2007b		76	0.26	30	0.00	76	0.04	67	0.04	34	0.23	43	0.10
Gierzod 1998		26	0.42	65	0.00	34	0.07	32	0.20	24	0.23	29	0.21
Gornostaeva 1994		61	0.31	49	0.00	64	0.03	79	0.03	73	0.03	84	0.03
Groot 1988		53	0.33	19	0.00	61	0.04	59	0.04	69	0.03	85	0.03
Harasiewicz 1955		67	0.30	85	0.00	31	0.07	24	0.29	44	0.10	31	0.17
Hatto 1993		2	0.91	2	0.03	2	0.88	2	0.93	2	0.95	2	0.94
Hatto 1997		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Horowitz 1949		48	0.34	33	0.00	60	0.04	68	0.04	45	0.07	65	0.05
Indjic 1988		1	0.94	1	0.90	1	0.89	1	0.95	2	0.96	1	0.95
Kapell 1951		9	0.53	38	0.00	8	0.17	7	0.52	16	0.45	9	0.48
Kissin 1993		73	0.28	80	0.00	65	0.03	76	0.03	51	0.06	71	0.04
Kushner 1989		47	0.35	66	0.00	73	0.03	70	0.03	69	0.04	79	0.03
Luisada 1991		7	0.57	39	0.00	7	0.18	4	0.56	4	0.55	6	0.55
Lushtak 2004		16	0.48	74	0.00	20	0.08	17	0.43	29	0.30	17	0.36
Malcuzynski 1961		34	0.39	16	0.00	56	0.03	74	0.03	57	0.04	80	0.03
Magaloff 1978		52	0.33	81	0.00	33	0.06	39	0.11	37	0.17	35	0.14
Magin 1975		15	0.48	82	0.00	11	0.10	21	0.34	16	0.36	18	0.35
Michalowski 1933		69	0.29	17	0.00	26	0.08	20	0.36	37	0.24	24	0.29
Milkina 1970		28	0.41	7	0.00	50	0.05	53	0.05	44	0.12	47	0.08
Mohovich 1999		44	0.36	12	0.00	38	0.05	41	0.10	31	0.24	33	0.15
Moravec 1969		50	0.34	11	0.00	52	0.05	49	0.05	44	0.08	62	0.06
Morozova 2008		23	0.46	50	0.00	13	0.14	22	0.34	46	0.06	36	0.14
Neighaus 1950		21	0.46	3	0.01	30	0.08	30	0.22	53	0.06	39	0.11
Niedzielski 1931		82	0.22	75	0.00	77	0.03	71	0.03	58	0.04	78	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		5	0.59	41	0.00	6	0.22	6	0.54	7	0.49	7	0.51
Osinska 1989		70	0.29	44	0.00	62	0.03	72	0.03	58	0.05	68	0.04
Pachmann 1927		78	0.25	67	0.00	63	0.03	78	0.03	36	0.18	57	0.07
Paderewski 1930		64	0.30	54	0.00	70	0.05	51	0.05	38	0.14	49	0.08
Perlemuter 1992		84	0.20	83	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	72	0.03	77	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		71	0.28	86	0.00	71	0.04	69	0.04	44	0.10	63	0.06
Poblocka 1999		22	0.46	45	0.00	22	0.14	15	0.44	27	0.25	19	0.33
Rabcewiczowa 1932		57	0.32	76	0.00	46	0.05	52	0.05	33	0.22	40	0.10
Rachmaninoff 1923		51	0.33	53	0.00	35	0.06	35	0.13	45	0.06	44	0.09
Rangell 2001		63	0.31	68	0.00	68	0.04	65	0.04	32	0.21	46	0.09
Richter 1976		65	0.30	51	0.00	72	0.03	73	0.03	61	0.04	81	0.03
Rosen 1989		40	0.37	10	0.00	58	0.04	61	0.04	38	0.16	52	0.08
Rosenthal 1930		42	0.37	37	0.00	49	0.07	45	0.07	59	0.04	66	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		74	0.28	77	0.00	80	0.05	54	0.05	62	0.03	72	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		72	0.28	87	0.00	79	0.03	83	0.03	51	0.05	75	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		62	0.31	60	0.00	78	0.03	87	0.03	66	0.03	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		77	0.25	31	0.00	75	0.05	55	0.05	39	0.10	60	0.07
Rossi 2007		90	-0.11	88	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	86	0.02	90	0.01
Rubinstein 1939		17	0.47	22	0.00	14	0.08	28	0.24	15	0.42	22	0.32
Rubinstein 1952		75	0.27	55	0.00	59	0.04	56	0.04	37	0.16	54	0.08
Rubinstein 1966		13	0.50	46	0.00	32	0.08	31	0.20	23	0.37	25	0.27
Schilhawsky 1960		39	0.37	34	0.00	24	0.11	25	0.29	32	0.24	26	0.26
Shebanova 2002		38	0.38	20	0.00	53	0.04	62	0.04	35	0.25	41	0.10
Smith 1975		24	0.45	47	0.00	12	0.10	11	0.46	32	0.23	20	0.33
Sokolov 2002		10	0.53	9	0.00	10	0.15	16	0.44	28	0.35	14	0.39
Sztompka 1959		45	0.36	40	0.00	48	0.05	47	0.05	67	0.04	70	0.04
Tomsic 1995		25	0.43	6	0.01	36	0.05	36	0.13	37	0.18	32	0.15
Uninsky 1932		49	0.34	89	0.00	41	0.05	34	0.15	67	0.04	50	0.08
Uninsky 1971		19	0.46	14	0.00	16	0.07	12	0.46	23	0.42	10	0.44
Wasowski 1980		37	0.38	21	0.00	28	0.10	26	0.27	47	0.07	34	0.14
Zak 1937		46	0.36	78	0.00	55	0.04	60	0.04	63	0.05	69	0.04
Zak 1951		54	0.33	90	0.00	54	0.06	46	0.06	44	0.12	48	0.08
Random 1		89	-0.02	69	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	64	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		88	0.07	48	0.00	87	0.03	81	0.03	1	0.48	38	0.12
Random 3		87	0.10	84	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	16	0.35	53	0.08

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).