Indjic 1988

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		65	0.27	50	0.00	48	0.05	51	0.05	44	0.09	52	0.07
Anderszewski 2003		6	0.56	51	0.00	5	0.24	8	0.50	7	0.53	7	0.51
Ashkenazy 1981		3	0.66	22	0.00	3	0.47	3	0.81	2	0.66	3	0.73
Bacha 2000		14	0.45	3	0.00	34	0.05	35	0.18	16	0.47	19	0.29
Badura 1965		78	0.22	35	0.00	60	0.06	47	0.06	58	0.04	61	0.05
Barbosa 1983		30	0.38	6	0.00	11	0.10	14	0.38	29	0.38	11	0.38
Biret 1990		19	0.43	36	0.00	22	0.07	17	0.36	35	0.22	23	0.28
Blet 2003		11	0.48	52	0.00	14	0.16	13	0.39	20	0.37	12	0.38
Block 1995		86	0.13	53	0.00	78	0.02	86	0.02	70	0.03	87	0.02
Blumental 1952		20	0.43	54	0.00	23	0.07	28	0.24	18	0.33	22	0.28
Boshniakovich 1969		74	0.24	7	0.00	74	0.04	69	0.04	76	0.03	80	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		66	0.27	55	0.00	69	0.03	78	0.03	67	0.04	75	0.03
Bunin 1987		18	0.43	56	0.00	25	0.10	18	0.36	35	0.19	25	0.26
Bunin 1987b		16	0.44	57	0.00	24	0.09	16	0.36	35	0.19	24	0.26
Chiu 1999		23	0.41	37	0.00	15	0.10	19	0.34	27	0.39	14	0.36
Cohen 1997		67	0.27	38	0.00	70	0.02	83	0.02	37	0.15	63	0.05
Cortot 1951		77	0.23	39	0.00	81	0.02	85	0.02	70	0.03	89	0.02
Csalog 1996		64	0.27	23	0.00	51	0.05	53	0.05	30	0.29	38	0.12
Czerny 1949		84	0.19	58	0.00	72	0.03	70	0.03	65	0.03	78	0.03
Czerny 1990		36	0.37	17	0.00	28	0.06	23	0.28	43	0.11	31	0.18
Duchoud 2007		7	0.56	24	0.00	7	0.26	6	0.53	11	0.49	8	0.51
Ezaki 2006		39	0.36	40	0.00	30	0.06	26	0.25	44	0.08	35	0.14
Falvay 1989		40	0.36	4	0.00	50	0.04	65	0.04	52	0.05	65	0.04
Farrell 1958		60	0.29	25	0.00	84	0.03	73	0.03	64	0.03	76	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		63	0.28	59	0.00	46	0.04	64	0.04	35	0.16	49	0.08
Fliere 1977		21	0.42	60	0.00	29	0.07	27	0.24	42	0.11	34	0.16
Fou 1978		34	0.37	41	0.00	57	0.04	66	0.04	57	0.05	66	0.04
Francois 1956		82	0.19	18	0.00	68	0.03	72	0.03	55	0.04	84	0.03
Friedman 1923		73	0.25	42	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	49	0.06	73	0.04
Friedman 1923b		71	0.26	61	0.00	79	0.02	87	0.02	49	0.06	81	0.03
Friedman 1930		49	0.32	26	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.17	45	0.07	39	0.11
Garcia 2007		69	0.26	43	0.00	73	0.03	71	0.03	47	0.06	69	0.04
Garcia 2007b		48	0.32	10	0.00	37	0.05	34	0.18	5	0.54	16	0.31
Gierzod 1998		29	0.39	62	0.00	40	0.09	33	0.21	27	0.19	29	0.20
Gornostaeva 1994		80	0.21	63	0.00	75	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.02	88	0.02
Groot 1988		47	0.33	44	0.00	55	0.05	50	0.05	76	0.03	71	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		57	0.30	45	0.00	19	0.07	25	0.27	64	0.04	41	0.10
Hatto 1993		1	0.98	1	0.99	1	0.97	1	0.99	1	0.99	1	0.99
Hatto 1997		2	0.94	2	0.00	2	0.90	2	0.96	1	0.95	2	0.95
Horowitz 1949		42	0.35	19	0.00	54	0.05	60	0.05	52	0.05	60	0.05
Indjic 1988		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Kapell 1951		9	0.49	64	0.00	10	0.10	7	0.53	25	0.41	9	0.47
Kissin 1993		51	0.31	65	0.00	52	0.04	67	0.04	40	0.18	48	0.08
Kushner 1989		33	0.37	32	0.00	45	0.05	59	0.05	45	0.06	59	0.05
Luisada 1991		4	0.58	66	0.00	4	0.24	4	0.69	2	0.67	4	0.68
Lushtak 2004		24	0.41	27	0.00	31	0.06	32	0.22	64	0.04	45	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		32	0.38	67	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	66	0.04	67	0.04
Magaloff 1978		56	0.30	68	0.00	63	0.05	54	0.05	64	0.03	64	0.04
Magin 1975		8	0.55	13	0.00	8	0.31	10	0.47	5	0.56	6	0.51
Michalowski 1933		43	0.35	28	0.00	16	0.10	15	0.37	21	0.38	13	0.37
Milkina 1970		28	0.39	69	0.00	56	0.04	63	0.04	45	0.08	57	0.06
Mohovich 1999		55	0.30	8	0.00	61	0.05	57	0.05	42	0.14	50	0.08
Moravec 1969		50	0.32	70	0.00	49	0.05	48	0.05	45	0.07	55	0.06
Morozova 2008		17	0.44	29	0.00	13	0.12	22	0.30	39	0.12	30	0.19
Neighaus 1950		22	0.42	33	0.00	36	0.05	38	0.15	81	0.03	54	0.07
Niedzielski 1931		59	0.30	46	0.00	33	0.06	37	0.16	23	0.24	27	0.20
Ohlsson 1999		5	0.58	5	0.00	6	0.18	5	0.56	6	0.50	5	0.53
Osinska 1989		81	0.20	30	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	79	0.04	74	0.03
Pachmann 1927		70	0.26	71	0.00	65	0.05	49	0.05	38	0.15	44	0.09
Paderewski 1930		52	0.31	72	0.00	59	0.05	56	0.05	32	0.18	43	0.09
Perlemuter 1992		79	0.22	14	0.00	77	0.02	84	0.02	85	0.02	85	0.02
Pierdomenico 2008		62	0.28	73	0.00	58	0.05	58	0.05	46	0.06	58	0.05
Poblocka 1999		27	0.40	74	0.00	18	0.08	11	0.41	32	0.22	17	0.30
Rabcewiczowa 1932		85	0.18	75	0.00	82	0.03	76	0.03	80	0.02	86	0.02
Rachmaninoff 1923		58	0.30	47	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.09	60	0.04	56	0.06
Rangell 2001		61	0.28	76	0.00	67	0.05	61	0.05	41	0.16	46	0.09
Richter 1976		37	0.36	77	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.13	37	0.16	36	0.14
Rosen 1989		53	0.30	31	0.00	66	0.07	45	0.07	49	0.04	62	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		54	0.30	78	0.00	62	0.05	62	0.05	60	0.04	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		76	0.23	79	0.00	85	0.03	80	0.03	67	0.03	77	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.23	80	0.00	86	0.04	68	0.04	60	0.04	72	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		68	0.27	81	0.00	83	0.03	74	0.03	79	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		83	0.19	82	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	68	0.04	82	0.03
Rossi 2007		90	-0.16	83	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.01	90	0.01
Rubinstein 1939		15	0.45	20	0.00	20	0.06	29	0.24	14	0.43	15	0.32
Rubinstein 1952		72	0.25	48	0.00	64	0.06	46	0.06	39	0.13	47	0.09
Rubinstein 1966		13	0.45	11	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.15	32	0.28	28	0.20
Schilhawsky 1960		44	0.34	49	0.00	27	0.10	24	0.28	35	0.21	26	0.24
Shebanova 2002		12	0.46	15	0.00	9	0.15	9	0.48	25	0.38	10	0.43
Smith 1975		41	0.35	84	0.00	21	0.06	31	0.22	65	0.04	42	0.09
Sokolov 2002		10	0.48	85	0.00	12	0.09	20	0.34	33	0.27	18	0.30
Sztompka 1959		46	0.34	86	0.00	47	0.05	52	0.05	76	0.04	68	0.04
Tomsic 1995		25	0.40	16	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.10	49	0.05	51	0.07
Uninsky 1932		38	0.36	12	0.00	32	0.05	30	0.23	44	0.09	37	0.14
Uninsky 1971		31	0.38	9	0.00	26	0.10	12	0.40	39	0.21	21	0.29
Wasowski 1980		26	0.40	21	0.00	17	0.10	21	0.33	28	0.25	20	0.29
Zak 1937		35	0.37	87	0.00	41	0.07	41	0.13	37	0.21	32	0.17
Zak 1951		45	0.34	34	0.00	35	0.06	40	0.15	39	0.19	33	0.17
Random 1		89	0.00	88	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	40	0.10	79	0.03
Random 2		88	0.06	89	0.00	87	0.03	77	0.03	9	0.39	40	0.11
Random 3		87	0.09	90	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	29	0.26	53	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).