Gierzod 1998

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	0.62	50	0.00	27	0.05	39	0.15	36	0.13	41	0.14
Anderszewski 2003		42	0.61	13	0.02	23	0.06	30	0.19	15	0.43	17	0.29
Ashkenazy 1981		2	0.78	1	0.29	1	0.28	1	0.60	1	0.59	1	0.59
Bacha 2000		26	0.67	54	0.00	47	0.04	60	0.04	10	0.47	40	0.14
Badura 1965		74	0.47	37	0.00	65	0.03	69	0.03	56	0.04	87	0.03
Barbosa 1983		75	0.47	83	0.00	75	0.04	62	0.04	59	0.04	72	0.04
Biret 1990		9	0.72	33	0.00	15	0.07	12	0.33	13	0.34	11	0.33
Blet 2003		52	0.57	45	0.00	71	0.03	76	0.03	70	0.03	84	0.03
Block 1995		77	0.46	27	0.01	81	0.02	84	0.02	60	0.04	88	0.03
Blumental 1952		54	0.56	24	0.01	21	0.06	22	0.22	2	0.45	15	0.31
Boshniakovich 1969		40	0.62	19	0.01	59	0.05	47	0.05	49	0.05	68	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		47	0.59	44	0.00	68	0.03	80	0.03	44	0.09	66	0.05
Bunin 1987		51	0.57	84	0.00	74	0.05	48	0.05	65	0.04	74	0.04
Bunin 1987b		50	0.57	70	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	63	0.04	81	0.03
Chiu 1999		78	0.44	75	0.00	60	0.03	72	0.03	40	0.12	58	0.06
Cohen 1997		73	0.47	71	0.00	69	0.03	82	0.03	17	0.36	47	0.10
Cortot 1951		31	0.66	4	0.06	19	0.08	17	0.26	20	0.36	16	0.31
Csalog 1996		57	0.54	42	0.00	82	0.03	81	0.03	26	0.30	50	0.09
Czerny 1949		14	0.70	2	0.08	2	0.14	3	0.44	9	0.52	2	0.48
Czerny 1990		20	0.69	7	0.04	8	0.08	8	0.36	27	0.24	18	0.29
Duchoud 2007		27	0.66	64	0.00	42	0.06	40	0.13	35	0.21	37	0.17
Ezaki 2006		17	0.69	49	0.00	34	0.08	23	0.22	57	0.04	49	0.09
Falvay 1989		28	0.66	5	0.05	4	0.11	14	0.32	22	0.30	13	0.31
Farrell 1958		19	0.69	61	0.00	57	0.04	54	0.04	28	0.18	51	0.08
Ferenczy 1958		55	0.55	56	0.00	64	0.03	65	0.03	40	0.12	61	0.06
Fliere 1977		10	0.72	55	0.00	36	0.05	35	0.17	47	0.06	45	0.10
Fou 1978		69	0.49	48	0.00	49	0.03	64	0.03	50	0.06	70	0.04
Francois 1956		23	0.67	88	0.00	14	0.07	15	0.29	19	0.30	19	0.29
Friedman 1923		87	0.21	34	0.00	62	0.03	79	0.03	38	0.18	57	0.07
Friedman 1923b		86	0.22	85	0.00	63	0.03	63	0.03	38	0.19	53	0.08
Friedman 1930		76	0.46	10	0.02	38	0.06	29	0.19	15	0.40	20	0.28
Garcia 2007		81	0.36	81	0.00	76	0.03	67	0.03	60	0.04	86	0.03
Garcia 2007b		84	0.27	82	0.00	83	0.02	87	0.02	43	0.09	75	0.04
Gierzod 1998		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Gornostaeva 1994		15	0.70	12	0.02	45	0.04	52	0.04	40	0.16	54	0.08
Groot 1988		35	0.63	25	0.01	51	0.04	49	0.04	44	0.08	63	0.06
Harasiewicz 1955		71	0.48	72	0.00	33	0.08	26	0.21	48	0.05	48	0.10
Hatto 1993		72	0.48	57	0.00	30	0.05	38	0.16	14	0.36	30	0.24
Hatto 1997		61	0.53	35	0.00	22	0.06	27	0.21	21	0.35	23	0.27
Horowitz 1949		49	0.58	90	0.00	67	0.03	70	0.03	49	0.05	71	0.04
Indjic 1988		68	0.49	38	0.00	29	0.05	36	0.17	19	0.36	29	0.25
Kapell 1951		6	0.73	9	0.02	16	0.06	4	0.43	19	0.42	5	0.42
Kissin 1993		53	0.57	15	0.02	12	0.07	41	0.12	35	0.22	39	0.16
Kushner 1989		8	0.73	63	0.00	26	0.05	21	0.22	24	0.30	24	0.26
Luisada 1991		43	0.61	29	0.00	11	0.07	31	0.19	28	0.25	32	0.22
Lushtak 2004		36	0.62	17	0.02	20	0.06	16	0.26	36	0.16	35	0.20
Malcuzynski 1961		3	0.77	30	0.00	13	0.08	11	0.35	19	0.31	10	0.33
Magaloff 1978		11	0.71	40	0.00	9	0.06	18	0.25	31	0.25	28	0.25
Magin 1975		58	0.54	41	0.00	52	0.04	51	0.04	44	0.09	59	0.06
Michalowski 1933		66	0.49	51	0.00	24	0.06	9	0.36	13	0.44	8	0.40
Milkina 1970		38	0.62	52	0.00	50	0.05	45	0.05	44	0.14	52	0.08
Mohovich 1999		29	0.66	20	0.01	48	0.04	53	0.04	78	0.03	89	0.03
Moravec 1969		13	0.71	11	0.02	7	0.07	10	0.35	3	0.54	4	0.43
Morozova 2008		70	0.48	28	0.00	56	0.04	55	0.04	45	0.06	67	0.05
Neighaus 1950		4	0.75	65	0.00	6	0.09	7	0.36	20	0.36	9	0.36
Niedzielski 1931		48	0.58	46	0.00	46	0.04	56	0.04	10	0.37	43	0.12
Ohlsson 1999		1	0.78	3	0.07	3	0.11	2	0.45	10	0.49	3	0.47
Osinska 1989		21	0.68	73	0.00	28	0.05	24	0.21	22	0.30	27	0.25
Pachmann 1927		82	0.35	67	0.00	86	0.02	85	0.02	57	0.05	83	0.03
Paderewski 1930		22	0.68	26	0.01	35	0.04	33	0.18	14	0.37	25	0.26
Perlemuter 1992		67	0.49	66	0.00	70	0.03	66	0.03	73	0.03	77	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		45	0.60	86	0.00	55	0.04	61	0.04	38	0.13	55	0.07
Poblocka 1999		7	0.73	6	0.04	17	0.08	6	0.38	15	0.43	7	0.40
Rabcewiczowa 1932		32	0.65	31	0.00	37	0.07	20	0.23	15	0.41	14	0.31
Rachmaninoff 1923		80	0.42	78	0.00	72	0.04	59	0.04	70	0.03	79	0.03
Rangell 2001		41	0.61	39	0.00	58	0.05	46	0.05	48	0.06	69	0.05
Richter 1976		79	0.43	53	0.00	85	0.03	77	0.03	83	0.03	82	0.03
Rosen 1989		5	0.73	22	0.01	18	0.08	13	0.32	7	0.54	6	0.42
Rosenthal 1930		30	0.66	76	0.00	54	0.04	50	0.04	27	0.28	44	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		65	0.49	47	0.00	79	0.04	57	0.04	39	0.12	56	0.07
Rosenthal 1931b		64	0.51	60	0.00	77	0.03	71	0.03	38	0.13	64	0.06
Rosenthal 1931c		25	0.67	16	0.02	44	0.05	44	0.09	21	0.33	38	0.17
Rosenthal 1931d		56	0.54	62	0.00	78	0.03	68	0.03	36	0.13	62	0.06
Rossi 2007		88	0.17	89	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	51	0.04	78	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		83	0.30	43	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	50	0.05	80	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		59	0.53	58	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	39	0.13	65	0.06
Rubinstein 1966		60	0.53	74	0.00	80	0.03	74	0.03	56	0.05	73	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		16	0.69	32	0.00	25	0.05	19	0.24	23	0.29	26	0.26
Shebanova 2002		18	0.69	79	0.00	32	0.06	32	0.19	20	0.42	21	0.28
Smith 1975		12	0.71	18	0.01	5	0.09	5	0.40	23	0.26	12	0.32
Sokolov 2002		24	0.67	14	0.02	43	0.05	42	0.12	42	0.15	42	0.13
Sztompka 1959		33	0.64	23	0.01	39	0.06	28	0.20	20	0.37	22	0.27
Tomsic 1995		37	0.62	68	0.00	53	0.04	58	0.04	43	0.09	60	0.06
Uninsky 1932		63	0.52	21	0.01	40	0.07	34	0.18	30	0.29	31	0.23
Uninsky 1971		44	0.60	36	0.00	41	0.05	43	0.11	31	0.28	36	0.18
Wasowski 1980		62	0.52	69	0.00	66	0.03	75	0.03	66	0.04	76	0.03
Zak 1937		34	0.64	87	0.00	31	0.06	37	0.17	30	0.24	34	0.20
Zak 1951		46	0.60	8	0.03	10	0.08	25	0.21	33	0.22	33	0.21
Random 1		90	-0.10	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	85	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		89	-0.05	59	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	47	0.04	85	0.03
Random 3		85	0.24	77	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	5	0.49	46	0.10

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).