Horowitz 1949

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		61	0.39	87	0.00	65	0.05	54	0.05	73	0.03	66	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		77	0.33	56	0.00	69	0.03	77	0.03	59	0.03	79	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		21	0.52	11	0.02	9	0.09	18	0.35	44	0.09	33	0.18
Bacha 2000		69	0.36	82	0.00	78	0.04	66	0.04	70	0.03	73	0.03
Badura 1965		74	0.34	68	0.00	75	0.04	61	0.04	78	0.03	82	0.03
Barbosa 1983		67	0.38	44	0.00	61	0.04	56	0.04	78	0.04	62	0.04
Biret 1990		48	0.43	48	0.00	59	0.04	59	0.04	56	0.04	70	0.04
Blet 2003		50	0.43	45	0.00	66	0.04	57	0.04	62	0.05	64	0.04
Block 1995		47	0.44	20	0.00	49	0.05	50	0.05	44	0.10	46	0.07
Blumental 1952		62	0.39	17	0.01	21	0.05	42	0.09	27	0.24	37	0.15
Boshniakovich 1969		13	0.54	23	0.00	14	0.06	29	0.26	25	0.37	19	0.31
Brailowsky 1960		19	0.53	41	0.00	22	0.06	19	0.34	7	0.50	10	0.41
Bunin 1987		17	0.53	18	0.01	33	0.09	26	0.31	42	0.14	28	0.21
Bunin 1987b		16	0.53	42	0.00	32	0.08	25	0.31	41	0.14	27	0.21
Chiu 1999		27	0.49	5	0.05	7	0.19	8	0.49	14	0.51	5	0.50
Cohen 1997		84	0.19	36	0.00	86	0.03	71	0.03	73	0.03	83	0.03
Cortot 1951		78	0.32	69	0.00	80	0.02	85	0.02	79	0.03	89	0.02
Csalog 1996		60	0.40	50	0.00	77	0.03	78	0.03	54	0.06	63	0.04
Czerny 1949		52	0.43	70	0.00	63	0.04	55	0.04	50	0.06	56	0.05
Czerny 1990		8	0.58	47	0.00	12	0.08	11	0.40	21	0.30	15	0.35
Duchoud 2007		63	0.39	59	0.00	73	0.03	75	0.03	85	0.03	81	0.03
Ezaki 2006		54	0.43	64	0.00	37	0.05	36	0.14	56	0.05	43	0.08
Falvay 1989		14	0.54	77	0.00	18	0.07	15	0.37	24	0.25	20	0.30
Farrell 1958		31	0.49	43	0.00	41	0.05	37	0.12	11	0.44	26	0.23
Ferenczy 1958		82	0.26	71	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	71	0.03	86	0.02
Fliere 1977		11	0.57	83	0.00	17	0.06	14	0.38	41	0.11	30	0.20
Fou 1978		36	0.48	40	0.00	29	0.07	24	0.31	37	0.22	22	0.26
Francois 1956		24	0.50	21	0.00	30	0.08	21	0.33	26	0.28	21	0.30
Friedman 1923		86	0.16	66	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	60	0.06	72	0.04
Friedman 1923b		85	0.18	55	0.00	84	0.03	76	0.03	63	0.05	68	0.04
Friedman 1930		75	0.33	46	0.00	64	0.05	53	0.05	70	0.03	65	0.04
Garcia 2007		81	0.28	51	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	44	0.10	57	0.05
Garcia 2007b		83	0.24	75	0.00	83	0.03	73	0.03	59	0.04	84	0.03
Gierzod 1998		58	0.42	88	0.00	67	0.04	58	0.04	79	0.03	80	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		34	0.48	58	0.00	62	0.04	60	0.04	53	0.04	69	0.04
Groot 1988		1	0.64	15	0.01	5	0.17	4	0.52	12	0.45	6	0.48
Harasiewicz 1955		35	0.48	29	0.00	11	0.08	13	0.39	37	0.18	23	0.26
Hatto 1993		72	0.34	84	0.00	52	0.04	65	0.04	52	0.05	71	0.04
Hatto 1997		71	0.34	78	0.00	54	0.07	45	0.07	68	0.04	53	0.05
Horowitz 1949		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Indjic 1988		70	0.35	72	0.00	53	0.05	52	0.05	60	0.05	52	0.05
Kapell 1951		22	0.51	6	0.04	15	0.06	32	0.19	42	0.12	36	0.15
Kissin 1993		20	0.52	8	0.02	20	0.06	9	0.42	34	0.25	17	0.32
Kushner 1989		23	0.51	74	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.07	53	0.04	50	0.05
Luisada 1991		39	0.46	26	0.00	51	0.04	70	0.04	55	0.05	58	0.04
Lushtak 2004		56	0.42	34	0.00	43	0.04	43	0.08	49	0.05	48	0.06
Malcuzynski 1961		2	0.64	10	0.02	6	0.17	5	0.51	18	0.39	9	0.45
Magaloff 1978		5	0.62	7	0.03	4	0.16	2	0.55	13	0.37	8	0.45
Magin 1975		37	0.47	30	0.00	24	0.06	35	0.15	29	0.22	32	0.18
Michalowski 1933		79	0.29	53	0.00	71	0.03	79	0.03	76	0.04	77	0.03
Milkina 1970		15	0.53	39	0.00	26	0.08	22	0.32	21	0.36	16	0.34
Mohovich 1999		18	0.53	52	0.00	28	0.08	20	0.33	36	0.18	25	0.24
Moravec 1969		7	0.59	4	0.05	8	0.11	7	0.50	6	0.51	4	0.50
Morozova 2008		29	0.49	38	0.00	23	0.06	17	0.36	42	0.10	31	0.19
Neighaus 1950		10	0.58	60	0.00	13	0.07	12	0.39	59	0.05	38	0.14
Niedzielski 1931		25	0.50	27	0.00	27	0.07	28	0.27	2	0.59	11	0.40
Ohlsson 1999		38	0.47	31	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	59	0.04	61	0.04
Osinska 1989		53	0.43	33	0.00	68	0.04	68	0.04	48	0.06	49	0.05
Pachmann 1927		55	0.43	67	0.00	42	0.05	39	0.10	28	0.27	35	0.16
Paderewski 1930		57	0.42	24	0.00	70	0.03	81	0.03	63	0.03	76	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		43	0.46	35	0.00	34	0.08	31	0.21	41	0.12	34	0.16
Pierdomenico 2008		40	0.46	28	0.00	25	0.07	27	0.31	10	0.44	13	0.37
Poblocka 1999		49	0.43	54	0.00	58	0.03	72	0.03	65	0.04	74	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		73	0.34	89	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	77	0.03	75	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		6	0.60	1	0.32	1	0.32	1	0.72	1	0.77	1	0.74
Rangell 2001		42	0.46	22	0.00	40	0.04	41	0.09	51	0.05	47	0.07
Richter 1976		26	0.50	13	0.01	19	0.06	16	0.36	18	0.36	14	0.36
Rosen 1989		45	0.44	49	0.00	60	0.04	67	0.04	65	0.04	67	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		33	0.48	25	0.00	35	0.06	33	0.19	19	0.49	18	0.31
Rosenthal 1931		76	0.33	76	0.00	55	0.05	51	0.05	25	0.28	39	0.12
Rosenthal 1931b		64	0.38	86	0.00	39	0.05	38	0.12	20	0.37	29	0.21
Rosenthal 1931c		44	0.45	61	0.00	47	0.06	46	0.06	33	0.23	40	0.12
Rosenthal 1931d		51	0.43	85	0.00	36	0.06	34	0.16	12	0.40	24	0.25
Rossi 2007		87	0.09	90	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.28	37	0.00	79	0.03	84	0.03	36	0.17	44	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		30	0.49	32	0.00	46	0.05	48	0.05	28	0.24	41	0.11
Rubinstein 1966		59	0.41	79	0.00	38	0.05	40	0.09	59	0.05	45	0.07
Schilhawsky 1960		12	0.55	12	0.02	10	0.07	10	0.41	6	0.52	7	0.46
Shebanova 2002		28	0.49	14	0.01	45	0.05	49	0.05	62	0.05	55	0.05
Smith 1975		68	0.37	73	0.00	74	0.04	63	0.04	69	0.04	60	0.04
Sokolov 2002		41	0.46	57	0.00	56	0.04	69	0.04	53	0.05	59	0.04
Sztompka 1959		66	0.38	19	0.00	50	0.04	64	0.04	51	0.06	51	0.05
Tomsic 1995		32	0.48	62	0.00	31	0.09	30	0.21	47	0.05	42	0.10
Uninsky 1932		46	0.44	16	0.01	48	0.05	47	0.05	63	0.05	54	0.05
Uninsky 1971		65	0.38	65	0.00	72	0.03	74	0.03	72	0.03	78	0.03
Wasowski 1980		9	0.58	9	0.02	16	0.06	23	0.31	6	0.47	12	0.38
Zak 1937		3	0.64	3	0.08	3	0.32	3	0.55	6	0.57	2	0.56
Zak 1951		4	0.63	2	0.21	2	0.26	6	0.51	8	0.54	3	0.52
Random 1		90	-0.10	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	81	0.03	88	0.02
Random 2		88	0.00	81	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	73	0.03	87	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.01	63	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	76	0.02	90	0.01

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).