Afanassiev 2001

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		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Anderszewski 2003		74	0.36	55	0.00	65	0.04	53	0.04	83	0.02	79	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		67	0.48	83	0.00	54	0.04	51	0.04	49	0.05	71	0.04
Bacha 2000		63	0.51	30	0.00	77	0.03	77	0.03	52	0.05	64	0.04
Badura 1965		33	0.65	42	0.00	15	0.08	11	0.37	1	0.63	5	0.48
Barbosa 1983		17	0.71	10	0.02	12	0.09	10	0.39	7	0.49	8	0.44
Biret 1990		20	0.70	22	0.01	32	0.07	27	0.24	26	0.25	30	0.24
Blet 2003		4	0.80	29	0.00	7	0.10	6	0.43	5	0.52	6	0.47
Block 1995		64	0.51	87	0.00	79	0.03	72	0.03	70	0.03	80	0.03
Blumental 1952		76	0.33	69	0.00	47	0.04	50	0.04	37	0.12	55	0.07
Boshniakovich 1969		57	0.55	75	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	71	0.03	81	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		59	0.52	25	0.00	80	0.04	64	0.04	66	0.04	66	0.04
Bunin 1987		40	0.63	20	0.01	44	0.05	41	0.10	35	0.21	44	0.14
Bunin 1987b		39	0.63	76	0.00	45	0.09	42	0.09	35	0.21	40	0.14
Chiu 1999		60	0.52	23	0.01	50	0.03	70	0.03	41	0.12	58	0.06
Cohen 1997		86	0.15	50	0.00	85	0.02	85	0.02	85	0.02	86	0.02
Cortot 1951		36	0.64	79	0.00	42	0.04	43	0.09	28	0.29	37	0.16
Csalog 1996		52	0.58	38	0.00	71	0.03	71	0.03	30	0.27	49	0.09
Czerny 1949		6	0.78	6	0.04	4	0.27	2	0.54	4	0.59	2	0.56
Czerny 1990		1	0.83	2	0.16	2	0.25	3	0.54	3	0.52	3	0.53
Duchoud 2007		21	0.70	17	0.01	10	0.07	16	0.34	20	0.41	14	0.37
Ezaki 2006		2	0.82	1	0.25	1	0.25	1	0.62	1	0.61	1	0.61
Falvay 1989		13	0.74	18	0.01	22	0.06	25	0.27	20	0.31	23	0.29
Farrell 1958		54	0.56	59	0.00	76	0.03	78	0.03	82	0.03	75	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		43	0.62	70	0.00	43	0.04	45	0.07	26	0.30	42	0.14
Fliere 1977		11	0.74	56	0.00	24	0.05	23	0.27	44	0.10	35	0.16
Fou 1978		47	0.58	45	0.00	48	0.04	52	0.04	45	0.08	59	0.06
Francois 1956		3	0.81	3	0.09	3	0.19	4	0.51	3	0.56	4	0.53
Friedman 1923		85	0.18	58	0.00	67	0.04	57	0.04	21	0.36	45	0.12
Friedman 1923b		84	0.19	39	0.00	66	0.03	67	0.03	20	0.36	48	0.10
Friedman 1930		80	0.26	84	0.00	64	0.04	62	0.04	39	0.12	52	0.07
Garcia 2007		78	0.27	53	0.00	82	0.02	82	0.02	83	0.02	85	0.02
Garcia 2007b		87	0.04	12	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.02	82	0.02	89	0.02
Gierzod 1998		45	0.62	19	0.01	33	0.06	36	0.13	39	0.15	43	0.14
Gornostaeva 1994		12	0.74	11	0.02	9	0.10	8	0.40	13	0.37	13	0.38
Groot 1988		7	0.78	5	0.06	17	0.10	17	0.33	19	0.36	18	0.34
Harasiewicz 1955		68	0.47	66	0.00	41	0.04	44	0.08	45	0.05	61	0.06
Hatto 1993		83	0.20	37	0.00	62	0.04	61	0.04	46	0.04	72	0.04
Hatto 1997		75	0.34	8	0.02	46	0.05	48	0.05	38	0.11	53	0.07
Horowitz 1949		69	0.47	85	0.00	74	0.05	47	0.05	53	0.05	62	0.05
Indjic 1988		81	0.25	68	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	41	0.09	63	0.05
Kapell 1951		24	0.70	35	0.00	39	0.05	33	0.17	28	0.34	29	0.24
Kissin 1993		28	0.67	62	0.00	35	0.04	34	0.15	27	0.25	34	0.19
Kushner 1989		14	0.74	73	0.00	11	0.09	15	0.34	15	0.37	16	0.35
Luisada 1991		61	0.52	60	0.00	49	0.04	58	0.04	67	0.04	65	0.04
Lushtak 2004		38	0.63	71	0.00	26	0.06	22	0.28	26	0.22	28	0.25
Malcuzynski 1961		5	0.78	21	0.01	8	0.09	5	0.43	14	0.42	10	0.42
Magaloff 1978		46	0.59	49	0.00	58	0.04	66	0.04	51	0.04	67	0.04
Magin 1975		70	0.40	77	0.00	55	0.04	60	0.04	57	0.04	69	0.04
Michalowski 1933		79	0.27	43	0.00	63	0.04	65	0.04	42	0.13	51	0.07
Milkina 1970		29	0.66	57	0.00	51	0.04	54	0.04	60	0.04	70	0.04
Mohovich 1999		10	0.76	26	0.00	18	0.07	18	0.32	20	0.36	17	0.34
Moravec 1969		18	0.71	63	0.00	40	0.05	38	0.10	17	0.36	33	0.19
Morozova 2008		37	0.63	7	0.03	6	0.09	20	0.30	10	0.29	24	0.29
Neighaus 1950		23	0.70	52	0.00	14	0.09	13	0.35	24	0.33	19	0.34
Niedzielski 1931		66	0.49	86	0.00	78	0.03	68	0.03	73	0.02	83	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		32	0.66	40	0.00	37	0.04	37	0.11	28	0.21	39	0.15
Osinska 1989		8	0.77	61	0.00	16	0.08	14	0.35	5	0.47	11	0.41
Pachmann 1927		65	0.50	24	0.01	72	0.04	59	0.04	27	0.28	46	0.11
Paderewski 1930		58	0.53	88	0.00	73	0.04	55	0.04	56	0.03	77	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		30	0.66	28	0.00	36	0.05	35	0.14	31	0.19	36	0.16
Pierdomenico 2008		55	0.55	80	0.00	56	0.04	63	0.04	61	0.04	68	0.04
Poblocka 1999		16	0.72	27	0.00	27	0.07	29	0.23	22	0.32	25	0.27
Rabcewiczowa 1932		26	0.68	36	0.00	21	0.06	21	0.28	8	0.47	15	0.36
Rachmaninoff 1923		42	0.62	34	0.00	30	0.06	32	0.19	24	0.26	31	0.22
Rangell 2001		48	0.58	15	0.01	57	0.03	75	0.03	43	0.11	60	0.06
Richter 1976		53	0.57	89	0.00	69	0.03	79	0.03	60	0.04	76	0.03
Rosen 1989		22	0.70	4	0.06	5	0.11	7	0.42	11	0.47	9	0.44
Rosenthal 1930		56	0.55	33	0.00	60	0.04	56	0.04	36	0.19	50	0.09
Rosenthal 1931		73	0.36	72	0.00	81	0.03	74	0.03	67	0.03	78	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		77	0.29	74	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	78	0.03	88	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		62	0.51	82	0.00	59	0.03	69	0.03	47	0.06	73	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		71	0.37	67	0.00	84	0.02	83	0.02	84	0.02	87	0.02
Rossi 2007		72	0.36	51	0.00	34	0.05	40	0.10	20	0.22	38	0.15
Rubinstein 1939		82	0.24	14	0.02	88	0.02	89	0.02	73	0.03	82	0.02
Rubinstein 1952		50	0.58	9	0.02	70	0.03	80	0.03	53	0.06	74	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		34	0.65	41	0.00	53	0.06	46	0.06	26	0.31	41	0.14
Schilhawsky 1960		51	0.58	54	0.00	38	0.04	39	0.10	43	0.10	47	0.10
Shebanova 2002		41	0.63	64	0.00	52	0.05	49	0.05	41	0.11	54	0.07
Smith 1975		27	0.68	44	0.00	23	0.05	19	0.30	40	0.13	32	0.20
Sokolov 2002		19	0.70	65	0.00	31	0.06	28	0.23	29	0.29	27	0.26
Sztompka 1959		15	0.72	46	0.00	20	0.06	12	0.37	17	0.39	12	0.38
Tomsic 1995		9	0.77	48	0.00	13	0.07	9	0.40	11	0.48	7	0.44
Uninsky 1932		44	0.62	16	0.01	29	0.08	31	0.21	17	0.43	22	0.30
Uninsky 1971		25	0.68	13	0.02	19	0.07	24	0.27	20	0.41	20	0.33
Wasowski 1980		49	0.58	47	0.00	68	0.03	81	0.03	36	0.12	57	0.06
Zak 1937		35	0.65	32	0.00	28	0.06	30	0.22	17	0.33	26	0.27
Zak 1951		31	0.66	31	0.00	25	0.06	26	0.26	19	0.36	21	0.31
Random 1		90	-0.16	78	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	83	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		89	-0.15	90	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	81	0.02	84	0.02
Random 3		88	0.01	81	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	25	0.23	56	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).