Francois 1956

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		3	0.81	2	0.14	2	0.23	3	0.56	4	0.51	2	0.53
Anderszewski 2003		73	0.40	42	0.00	72	0.04	65	0.04	48	0.04	72	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		68	0.45	37	0.00	51	0.05	49	0.05	52	0.04	74	0.04
Bacha 2000		70	0.42	57	0.00	82	0.03	80	0.03	47	0.06	67	0.04
Badura 1965		56	0.52	51	0.00	55	0.04	62	0.04	52	0.04	73	0.04
Barbosa 1983		22	0.67	29	0.01	23	0.07	24	0.26	15	0.40	18	0.32
Biret 1990		29	0.63	15	0.01	40	0.04	37	0.13	39	0.15	39	0.14
Blet 2003		28	0.64	59	0.00	39	0.05	33	0.15	37	0.15	38	0.15
Block 1995		61	0.49	70	0.00	76	0.03	81	0.03	54	0.04	81	0.03
Blumental 1952		79	0.22	65	0.00	63	0.03	72	0.03	51	0.04	82	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		67	0.46	77	0.00	74	0.03	73	0.03	69	0.03	83	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		63	0.48	50	0.00	77	0.03	83	0.03	61	0.04	76	0.03
Bunin 1987		38	0.62	35	0.00	47	0.05	50	0.05	36	0.20	49	0.10
Bunin 1987b		39	0.62	44	0.00	48	0.07	45	0.07	36	0.19	44	0.12
Chiu 1999		71	0.41	69	0.00	65	0.04	66	0.04	51	0.05	70	0.04
Cohen 1997		82	0.19	46	0.00	84	0.02	84	0.02	61	0.04	84	0.03
Cortot 1951		44	0.58	10	0.02	46	0.05	54	0.05	33	0.22	51	0.10
Csalog 1996		58	0.51	31	0.01	53	0.05	47	0.05	36	0.22	48	0.10
Czerny 1949		1	0.83	1	0.27	1	0.27	1	0.68	2	0.68	1	0.68
Czerny 1990		4	0.79	24	0.01	6	0.14	2	0.56	8	0.46	5	0.51
Duchoud 2007		30	0.63	78	0.00	45	0.05	51	0.05	41	0.12	58	0.08
Ezaki 2006		8	0.75	8	0.02	11	0.15	8	0.48	11	0.43	9	0.45
Falvay 1989		7	0.75	6	0.04	9	0.12	6	0.52	10	0.42	7	0.47
Farrell 1958		48	0.57	18	0.01	60	0.04	68	0.04	34	0.13	59	0.07
Ferenczy 1958		43	0.58	43	0.00	50	0.05	52	0.05	34	0.24	46	0.11
Fliere 1977		13	0.72	74	0.00	21	0.07	21	0.29	27	0.23	24	0.26
Fou 1978		53	0.53	16	0.01	18	0.07	28	0.19	37	0.20	31	0.19
Francois 1956		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1923		86	0.08	88	0.00	68	0.05	56	0.05	37	0.20	52	0.10
Friedman 1923b		85	0.09	72	0.00	67	0.05	48	0.05	36	0.19	50	0.10
Friedman 1930		74	0.38	75	0.00	57	0.03	74	0.03	29	0.30	55	0.09
Garcia 2007		83	0.16	79	0.00	85	0.02	85	0.02	79	0.03	88	0.02
Garcia 2007b		87	-0.01	85	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	80	0.03	90	0.02
Gierzod 1998		21	0.67	61	0.00	24	0.07	19	0.30	15	0.29	21	0.29
Gornostaeva 1994		5	0.77	4	0.07	5	0.14	9	0.46	6	0.46	8	0.46
Groot 1988		2	0.82	5	0.06	4	0.12	5	0.54	5	0.50	3	0.52
Harasiewicz 1955		54	0.53	27	0.01	31	0.05	27	0.20	33	0.17	34	0.18
Hatto 1993		84	0.14	80	0.00	81	0.03	82	0.03	62	0.03	86	0.03
Hatto 1997		78	0.27	67	0.00	73	0.04	59	0.04	75	0.03	80	0.03
Horowitz 1949		50	0.56	23	0.01	28	0.07	31	0.19	26	0.27	28	0.23
Indjic 1988		81	0.19	71	0.00	80	0.03	75	0.03	72	0.03	79	0.03
Kapell 1951		11	0.73	9	0.02	14	0.08	15	0.33	22	0.40	14	0.36
Kissin 1993		35	0.62	41	0.00	33	0.07	30	0.19	22	0.32	26	0.25
Kushner 1989		19	0.67	63	0.00	26	0.07	23	0.27	25	0.30	22	0.28
Luisada 1991		69	0.45	40	0.00	70	0.04	71	0.04	53	0.05	68	0.04
Lushtak 2004		51	0.54	55	0.00	34	0.07	29	0.19	34	0.17	33	0.18
Malcuzynski 1961		6	0.76	26	0.01	10	0.11	7	0.49	9	0.47	6	0.48
Magaloff 1978		27	0.64	17	0.01	35	0.05	32	0.17	39	0.15	36	0.16
Magin 1975		75	0.35	22	0.01	29	0.05	44	0.09	61	0.03	66	0.05
Michalowski 1933		77	0.31	86	0.00	69	0.03	76	0.03	56	0.05	71	0.04
Milkina 1970		32	0.63	28	0.01	44	0.05	43	0.10	43	0.14	43	0.12
Mohovich 1999		9	0.74	33	0.00	13	0.09	11	0.38	21	0.36	13	0.37
Moravec 1969		10	0.74	48	0.00	19	0.06	26	0.23	14	0.43	19	0.31
Morozova 2008		59	0.51	76	0.00	32	0.05	36	0.13	34	0.14	41	0.13
Neighaus 1950		14	0.72	3	0.07	3	0.13	4	0.55	13	0.49	4	0.52
Niedzielski 1931		41	0.61	45	0.00	52	0.04	57	0.04	26	0.22	53	0.09
Ohlsson 1999		40	0.61	36	0.00	54	0.05	53	0.05	41	0.13	56	0.08
Osinska 1989		12	0.73	21	0.01	20	0.06	18	0.31	9	0.39	16	0.35
Pachmann 1927		66	0.47	83	0.00	58	0.03	78	0.03	41	0.13	61	0.06
Paderewski 1930		47	0.57	19	0.01	64	0.04	60	0.04	42	0.09	60	0.06
Perlemuter 1992		31	0.63	81	0.00	36	0.04	38	0.13	30	0.20	35	0.16
Pierdomenico 2008		42	0.59	56	0.00	49	0.06	46	0.06	28	0.22	45	0.11
Poblocka 1999		37	0.62	38	0.00	43	0.06	39	0.12	39	0.15	40	0.13
Rabcewiczowa 1932		17	0.70	14	0.01	15	0.08	10	0.38	10	0.47	10	0.42
Rachmaninoff 1923		26	0.65	32	0.00	27	0.07	20	0.29	20	0.29	20	0.29
Rangell 2001		64	0.47	89	0.00	83	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.03	85	0.03
Richter 1976		60	0.51	49	0.00	66	0.04	58	0.04	81	0.03	78	0.03
Rosen 1989		36	0.62	7	0.03	16	0.10	17	0.31	19	0.42	15	0.36
Rosenthal 1930		25	0.65	87	0.00	41	0.05	41	0.10	24	0.36	32	0.19
Rosenthal 1931		65	0.47	64	0.00	75	0.03	79	0.03	42	0.11	62	0.06
Rosenthal 1931b		72	0.40	68	0.00	79	0.04	67	0.04	43	0.09	64	0.06
Rosenthal 1931c		34	0.62	47	0.00	37	0.04	40	0.11	17	0.36	30	0.20
Rosenthal 1931d		62	0.49	34	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	52	0.05	75	0.04
Rossi 2007		76	0.34	53	0.00	71	0.04	61	0.04	15	0.25	47	0.10
Rubinstein 1939		80	0.22	58	0.00	86	0.02	89	0.02	67	0.04	77	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		45	0.58	11	0.02	59	0.04	64	0.04	43	0.10	65	0.06
Rubinstein 1966		49	0.57	52	0.00	56	0.04	70	0.04	31	0.21	54	0.09
Schilhawsky 1960		24	0.66	66	0.00	25	0.07	25	0.25	29	0.24	27	0.24
Shebanova 2002		52	0.53	39	0.00	62	0.04	63	0.04	33	0.18	57	0.08
Smith 1975		15	0.70	30	0.01	12	0.11	14	0.33	29	0.22	23	0.27
Sokolov 2002		23	0.66	60	0.00	22	0.07	22	0.27	33	0.26	25	0.26
Sztompka 1959		33	0.62	84	0.00	42	0.07	34	0.14	27	0.34	29	0.22
Tomsic 1995		18	0.69	25	0.01	17	0.09	16	0.32	16	0.37	17	0.34
Uninsky 1932		55	0.52	82	0.00	38	0.04	42	0.10	36	0.18	42	0.13
Uninsky 1971		46	0.57	12	0.01	30	0.05	35	0.13	39	0.19	37	0.16
Wasowski 1980		57	0.51	54	0.00	61	0.05	55	0.05	73	0.04	69	0.04
Zak 1937		20	0.67	20	0.01	7	0.12	13	0.34	12	0.41	12	0.37
Zak 1951		16	0.70	13	0.01	8	0.16	12	0.37	12	0.44	11	0.40
Random 1		90	-0.17	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	78	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.08	73	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	75	0.02	87	0.02
Random 3		88	-0.06	62	0.00	88	0.02	86	0.02	30	0.20	63	0.06

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).