Shebanova 2002

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		39	0.52	76	0.00	45	0.06	57	0.06	47	0.06	57	0.06
Anderszewski 2003		75	0.31	85	0.00	71	0.04	74	0.04	53	0.03	75	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		2	0.72	2	0.11	2	0.33	2	0.71	3	0.62	5	0.66
Bacha 2000		20	0.58	67	0.00	33	0.09	16	0.43	2	0.63	10	0.52
Badura 1965		60	0.42	54	0.00	49	0.06	52	0.06	34	0.21	50	0.11
Barbosa 1983		43	0.51	39	0.00	29	0.08	26	0.35	21	0.43	21	0.39
Biret 1990		47	0.49	53	0.00	46	0.06	49	0.06	51	0.05	65	0.05
Blet 2003		28	0.56	20	0.00	40	0.07	36	0.25	26	0.30	34	0.27
Block 1995		41	0.52	36	0.00	51	0.05	67	0.05	22	0.31	49	0.12
Blumental 1952		56	0.45	60	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.11	14	0.36	38	0.20
Boshniakovich 1969		16	0.59	58	0.00	37	0.09	34	0.27	23	0.41	29	0.33
Brailowsky 1960		50	0.47	86	0.00	56	0.06	53	0.06	66	0.04	59	0.05
Bunin 1987		70	0.35	77	0.00	77	0.03	76	0.03	70	0.04	79	0.03
Bunin 1987b		69	0.35	81	0.00	76	0.03	82	0.03	67	0.04	73	0.03
Chiu 1999		5	0.65	25	0.00	4	0.20	5	0.61	1	0.76	3	0.68
Cohen 1997		57	0.45	42	0.00	57	0.06	51	0.06	19	0.36	42	0.15
Cortot 1951		61	0.42	87	0.00	66	0.04	73	0.04	57	0.05	69	0.04
Csalog 1996		13	0.60	13	0.01	11	0.13	9	0.50	3	0.59	9	0.54
Czerny 1949		74	0.32	71	0.00	74	0.04	71	0.04	74	0.03	77	0.03
Czerny 1990		8	0.62	31	0.00	15	0.10	11	0.49	16	0.40	17	0.44
Duchoud 2007		34	0.54	8	0.02	26	0.06	28	0.35	28	0.38	25	0.36
Ezaki 2006		45	0.50	43	0.00	58	0.08	45	0.08	72	0.03	58	0.05
Falvay 1989		10	0.61	63	0.00	17	0.10	17	0.43	14	0.37	20	0.40
Farrell 1958		64	0.39	88	0.00	75	0.03	79	0.03	85	0.03	72	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		78	0.29	89	0.00	80	0.02	86	0.02	64	0.03	87	0.02
Fliere 1977		4	0.69	7	0.02	6	0.22	4	0.64	2	0.68	4	0.66
Fou 1978		7	0.63	50	0.00	8	0.12	8	0.53	7	0.51	12	0.52
Francois 1956		63	0.41	47	0.00	62	0.05	65	0.05	70	0.03	70	0.04
Friedman 1923		87	0.15	28	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	78	0.03	84	0.03
Friedman 1923b		86	0.16	41	0.00	78	0.03	84	0.03	74	0.04	80	0.03
Friedman 1930		81	0.26	57	0.00	72	0.04	72	0.04	74	0.03	76	0.03
Garcia 2007		71	0.35	59	0.00	68	0.06	56	0.06	14	0.45	41	0.16
Garcia 2007b		76	0.30	61	0.00	70	0.05	64	0.05	12	0.41	44	0.14
Gierzod 1998		33	0.54	78	0.00	27	0.07	22	0.39	21	0.27	30	0.32
Gornostaeva 1994		59	0.44	46	0.00	65	0.04	70	0.04	81	0.03	81	0.03
Groot 1988		14	0.60	15	0.01	35	0.07	31	0.31	27	0.30	31	0.30
Harasiewicz 1955		65	0.39	55	0.00	60	0.06	54	0.06	86	0.02	82	0.03
Hatto 1993		52	0.47	21	0.00	9	0.12	19	0.40	9	0.53	16	0.46
Hatto 1997		68	0.38	33	0.00	32	0.08	35	0.25	62	0.04	51	0.10
Horowitz 1949		48	0.49	16	0.01	50	0.05	62	0.05	49	0.05	62	0.05
Indjic 1988		53	0.46	48	0.00	10	0.14	25	0.38	9	0.48	18	0.43
Kapell 1951		42	0.51	38	0.00	59	0.06	55	0.06	58	0.04	61	0.05
Kissin 1993		1	0.77	1	0.59	1	0.58	1	0.79	1	0.81	1	0.80
Kushner 1989		3	0.69	12	0.01	5	0.19	3	0.66	2	0.80	2	0.73
Luisada 1991		18	0.58	11	0.01	3	0.19	7	0.53	5	0.55	8	0.54
Lushtak 2004		31	0.55	40	0.00	41	0.08	41	0.18	34	0.19	40	0.18
Malcuzynski 1961		11	0.61	27	0.00	25	0.06	29	0.34	48	0.05	47	0.13
Magaloff 1978		26	0.57	44	0.00	39	0.08	37	0.24	49	0.07	45	0.13
Magin 1975		49	0.49	24	0.00	31	0.07	30	0.32	21	0.27	32	0.29
Michalowski 1933		66	0.39	19	0.00	55	0.05	59	0.05	39	0.17	55	0.09
Milkina 1970		25	0.57	68	0.00	16	0.09	15	0.46	7	0.46	15	0.46
Mohovich 1999		44	0.50	37	0.00	61	0.05	60	0.05	49	0.05	63	0.05
Moravec 1969		22	0.58	73	0.00	12	0.16	10	0.50	4	0.55	11	0.52
Morozova 2008		35	0.53	34	0.00	18	0.09	23	0.39	19	0.30	28	0.34
Neighaus 1950		24	0.58	65	0.00	34	0.10	32	0.30	48	0.07	43	0.14
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.46	17	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.14	12	0.39	36	0.23
Ohlsson 1999		6	0.64	3	0.04	7	0.17	6	0.57	4	0.53	7	0.55
Osinska 1989		38	0.52	79	0.00	48	0.08	46	0.08	51	0.06	56	0.07
Pachmann 1927		40	0.52	35	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.12	21	0.44	37	0.23
Paderewski 1930		32	0.54	4	0.03	21	0.07	38	0.23	22	0.30	35	0.26
Perlemuter 1992		46	0.49	26	0.00	54	0.07	47	0.07	33	0.19	48	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		23	0.58	18	0.00	20	0.08	14	0.47	1	0.68	6	0.57
Poblocka 1999		12	0.60	9	0.02	19	0.08	20	0.40	21	0.31	27	0.35
Rabcewiczowa 1932		72	0.34	82	0.00	81	0.03	77	0.03	73	0.03	71	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		80	0.27	32	0.00	73	0.05	68	0.05	50	0.05	60	0.05
Rangell 2001		21	0.58	51	0.00	36	0.07	27	0.35	12	0.42	23	0.38
Richter 1976		29	0.56	10	0.01	22	0.07	39	0.22	22	0.33	33	0.27
Rosen 1989		15	0.60	30	0.00	30	0.09	24	0.38	19	0.39	22	0.38
Rosenthal 1930		77	0.30	80	0.00	83	0.03	78	0.03	79	0.03	78	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.19	22	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	79	0.03	86	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.20	45	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	84	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		73	0.32	74	0.00	82	0.03	75	0.03	64	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		82	0.25	75	0.00	85	0.03	80	0.03	83	0.02	88	0.02
Rossi 2007		85	0.18	49	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	52	0.03	85	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		79	0.28	84	0.00	47	0.06	50	0.06	28	0.29	46	0.13
Rubinstein 1952		9	0.61	62	0.00	14	0.08	12	0.49	7	0.55	13	0.52
Rubinstein 1966		27	0.56	64	0.00	28	0.09	21	0.39	12	0.45	19	0.42
Schilhawsky 1960		67	0.38	23	0.00	64	0.05	61	0.05	61	0.04	68	0.04
Shebanova 2002		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Smith 1975		55	0.45	66	0.00	63	0.05	58	0.05	56	0.04	67	0.04
Sokolov 2002		58	0.45	29	0.00	69	0.05	66	0.05	72	0.03	66	0.04
Sztompka 1959		37	0.52	14	0.01	52	0.05	63	0.05	41	0.16	54	0.09
Tomsic 1995		17	0.59	72	0.00	38	0.07	40	0.22	42	0.14	39	0.18
Uninsky 1932		51	0.47	5	0.02	53	0.06	48	0.06	36	0.16	52	0.10
Uninsky 1971		62	0.42	69	0.00	67	0.05	69	0.05	85	0.02	74	0.03
Wasowski 1980		36	0.53	6	0.02	23	0.07	33	0.27	8	0.45	26	0.35
Zak 1937		19	0.58	52	0.00	13	0.09	13	0.48	10	0.49	14	0.48
Zak 1951		30	0.55	83	0.00	24	0.07	18	0.42	28	0.31	24	0.36
Random 1		89	0.06	70	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	4	0.50	53	0.10
Random 2		90	-0.05	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	82	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3		88	0.08	56	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	38	0.14	64	0.05

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).