Csalog 1996

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		13	0.58	10	0.02	32	0.07	30	0.27	71	0.03	36	0.09
Anderszewski 2003		76	0.17	25	0.00	53	0.07	46	0.07	88	0.02	53	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		50	0.40	81	0.00	40	0.09	35	0.23	77	0.03	42	0.08
Bacha 2000		4	0.69	19	0.01	12	0.08	12	0.47	9	0.48	4	0.47
Badura 1965		55	0.36	36	0.00	37	0.09	33	0.25	55	0.04	30	0.10
Barbosa 1983		24	0.53	5	0.07	6	0.11	11	0.47	22	0.37	6	0.42
Biret 1990		8	0.62	62	0.00	10	0.09	14	0.46	45	0.07	21	0.18
Blet 2003		33	0.48	55	0.00	50	0.07	47	0.07	64	0.04	47	0.05
Block 1995		63	0.31	21	0.00	77	0.03	74	0.03	87	0.02	80	0.02
Blumental 1952		80	0.12	41	0.00	80	0.03	73	0.03	88	0.02	81	0.02
Boshniakovich 1969		57	0.35	29	0.00	62	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.02	82	0.02
Brailowsky 1960		36	0.48	58	0.00	13	0.08	28	0.28	39	0.12	19	0.18
Bunin 1987		69	0.28	51	0.00	74	0.02	85	0.02	81	0.03	83	0.02
Bunin 1987b		68	0.28	65	0.00	75	0.03	63	0.03	81	0.03	60	0.03
Chiu 1999		52	0.39	42	0.00	25	0.07	20	0.39	54	0.05	24	0.14
Cohen 1997		18	0.55	4	0.08	3	0.20	4	0.55	1	0.59	2	0.57
Cortot 1951		51	0.39	33	0.00	69	0.03	77	0.03	78	0.03	70	0.03
Csalog 1996		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Czerny 1949		58	0.34	72	0.00	60	0.03	62	0.03	80	0.03	65	0.03
Czerny 1990		45	0.42	52	0.00	58	0.04	60	0.04	83	0.03	67	0.03
Duchoud 2007		30	0.50	22	0.00	39	0.07	40	0.19	67	0.04	38	0.09
Ezaki 2006		49	0.41	48	0.00	52	0.06	50	0.06	73	0.03	50	0.04
Falvay 1989		6	0.63	16	0.01	9	0.10	5	0.54	54	0.05	23	0.16
Farrell 1958		35	0.48	57	0.00	68	0.03	71	0.03	72	0.03	59	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		38	0.47	34	0.00	54	0.06	48	0.06	66	0.03	54	0.04
Fliere 1977		23	0.53	37	0.00	28	0.08	22	0.37	81	0.03	27	0.11
Fou 1978		40	0.46	24	0.00	27	0.07	24	0.34	65	0.05	26	0.13
Francois 1956		28	0.51	38	0.00	34	0.09	36	0.22	47	0.05	33	0.10
Friedman 1923		90	-0.24	87	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.01	90	0.01
Friedman 1923b		89	-0.23	80	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	89	0.01	87	0.01
Friedman 1930		86	-0.10	46	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.01	86	0.01
Garcia 2007		79	0.12	66	0.00	84	0.03	65	0.03	88	0.01	78	0.02
Garcia 2007b		88	-0.15	69	0.00	88	0.02	86	0.02	90	0.01	89	0.01
Gierzod 1998		20	0.54	82	0.00	35	0.07	26	0.30	81	0.03	37	0.09
Gornostaeva 1994		42	0.43	53	0.00	66	0.03	70	0.03	85	0.02	84	0.02
Groot 1988		10	0.60	23	0.00	31	0.09	34	0.24	68	0.03	43	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		81	0.09	61	0.00	63	0.03	72	0.03	84	0.03	71	0.03
Hatto 1993		71	0.24	83	0.00	14	0.11	32	0.27	47	0.04	32	0.10
Hatto 1997		62	0.32	30	0.00	15	0.12	31	0.27	65	0.03	35	0.09
Horowitz 1949		39	0.46	59	0.00	42	0.07	39	0.19	61	0.04	34	0.09
Indjic 1988		66	0.29	84	0.00	11	0.09	29	0.27	39	0.11	22	0.17
Kapell 1951		25	0.53	74	0.00	38	0.07	41	0.18	65	0.04	41	0.08
Kissin 1993		27	0.51	6	0.03	22	0.10	9	0.52	43	0.13	15	0.26
Kushner 1989		32	0.49	56	0.00	48	0.06	51	0.06	73	0.03	52	0.04
Luisada 1991		70	0.27	39	0.00	29	0.09	38	0.22	81	0.03	40	0.08
Lushtak 2004		43	0.43	20	0.01	19	0.08	23	0.36	69	0.03	31	0.10
Malcuzynski 1961		34	0.48	85	0.00	64	0.03	69	0.03	77	0.03	61	0.03
Magaloff 1978		31	0.49	50	0.00	43	0.07	43	0.15	62	0.03	44	0.07
Magin 1975		77	0.16	43	0.00	51	0.06	54	0.06	75	0.02	57	0.03
Michalowski 1933		84	-0.01	12	0.01	79	0.02	83	0.02	86	0.02	76	0.02
Milkina 1970		5	0.67	31	0.00	8	0.08	10	0.50	30	0.24	10	0.35
Mohovich 1999		26	0.52	73	0.00	45	0.09	45	0.09	83	0.03	49	0.05
Moravec 1969		7	0.63	14	0.01	17	0.10	21	0.38	27	0.22	13	0.29
Morozova 2008		75	0.18	67	0.00	47	0.06	55	0.06	83	0.02	63	0.03
Neighaus 1950		47	0.41	47	0.00	65	0.03	67	0.03	71	0.03	69	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		22	0.53	40	0.00	33	0.07	37	0.22	34	0.17	18	0.19
Ohlsson 1999		11	0.60	27	0.00	5	0.15	7	0.52	24	0.25	8	0.36
Osinska 1989		15	0.56	49	0.00	30	0.11	15	0.44	59	0.04	25	0.13
Pachmann 1927		16	0.56	15	0.01	20	0.08	18	0.44	21	0.39	7	0.41
Paderewski 1930		46	0.42	68	0.00	57	0.05	57	0.05	86	0.02	62	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		67	0.29	54	0.00	59	0.03	61	0.03	69	0.03	56	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		56	0.35	86	0.00	41	0.09	42	0.18	71	0.03	45	0.07
Poblocka 1999		3	0.69	3	0.11	4	0.14	3	0.57	21	0.32	5	0.43
Rabcewiczowa 1932		61	0.32	63	0.00	71	0.04	58	0.04	81	0.02	58	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		78	0.13	88	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	85	0.02	73	0.02
Rangell 2001		14	0.58	44	0.00	24	0.07	19	0.44	45	0.07	20	0.18
Richter 1976		29	0.50	9	0.02	23	0.07	13	0.47	28	0.16	14	0.27
Rosen 1989		37	0.47	7	0.03	55	0.06	53	0.06	66	0.03	55	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		60	0.33	77	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	85	0.02	79	0.02
Rosenthal 1931		73	0.20	78	0.00	82	0.03	66	0.03	89	0.01	77	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		72	0.21	64	0.00	81	0.02	84	0.02	89	0.01	88	0.01
Rosenthal 1931c		53	0.37	60	0.00	73	0.04	59	0.04	87	0.02	72	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		59	0.34	75	0.00	56	0.05	56	0.05	75	0.02	68	0.03
Rossi 2007		87	-0.12	32	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	88	0.01	85	0.01
Rubinstein 1939		48	0.41	28	0.00	7	0.10	25	0.30	16	0.41	9	0.35
Rubinstein 1952		1	0.73	1	0.35	1	0.35	1	0.61	5	0.59	1	0.60
Rubinstein 1966		9	0.62	26	0.00	26	0.08	17	0.44	27	0.27	12	0.34
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.45	79	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	86	0.02	48	0.05
Shebanova 2002		2	0.70	2	0.11	2	0.29	2	0.58	9	0.50	3	0.54
Smith 1975		65	0.29	89	0.00	61	0.03	68	0.03	86	0.02	74	0.02
Sokolov 2002		44	0.42	17	0.01	49	0.06	49	0.06	66	0.03	51	0.04
Sztompka 1959		64	0.30	70	0.00	67	0.03	64	0.03	84	0.02	75	0.02
Tomsic 1995		19	0.54	13	0.01	36	0.07	27	0.29	57	0.04	28	0.11
Uninsky 1932		74	0.19	35	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.03	64	0.03
Uninsky 1971		54	0.37	8	0.02	46	0.06	52	0.06	50	0.05	46	0.05
Wasowski 1980		17	0.56	45	0.00	18	0.08	16	0.44	18	0.27	11	0.34
Zak 1937		12	0.59	18	0.01	16	0.08	6	0.53	42	0.12	16	0.25
Zak 1951		21	0.54	11	0.01	21	0.09	8	0.52	44	0.09	17	0.22
Random 1		85	-0.01	71	0.00	78	0.03	79	0.03	24	0.27	39	0.09
Random 2		83	0.02	76	0.00	72	0.03	75	0.03	16	0.31	29	0.10
Random 3		82	0.04	90	0.00	85	0.03	81	0.03	59	0.04	66	0.03

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).