Luisada 1991

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		52	0.52	89	0.00	54	0.04	67	0.04	58	0.04	67	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		3	0.74	3	0.10	2	0.22	3	0.49	12	0.49	3	0.49
Ashkenazy 1981		4	0.71	4	0.09	3	0.16	1	0.56	8	0.49	1	0.52
Bacha 2000		23	0.62	2	0.11	4	0.12	15	0.39	1	0.57	4	0.47
Badura 1965		82	0.32	65	0.00	75	0.03	73	0.03	72	0.03	80	0.03
Barbosa 1983		72	0.42	31	0.01	57	0.06	45	0.06	52	0.04	54	0.05
Biret 1990		10	0.70	42	0.00	16	0.07	4	0.46	10	0.39	9	0.42
Blet 2003		25	0.62	14	0.01	52	0.06	46	0.06	49	0.05	55	0.05
Block 1995		43	0.55	76	0.00	45	0.05	54	0.05	28	0.24	42	0.11
Blumental 1952		66	0.46	17	0.01	49	0.04	57	0.04	33	0.13	53	0.07
Boshniakovich 1969		33	0.61	47	0.00	44	0.06	42	0.12	51	0.05	49	0.08
Brailowsky 1960		2	0.74	8	0.03	8	0.10	16	0.38	12	0.40	11	0.39
Bunin 1987		49	0.53	59	0.00	71	0.04	56	0.04	78	0.03	81	0.03
Bunin 1987b		48	0.53	43	0.00	70	0.04	60	0.04	77	0.03	74	0.03
Chiu 1999		27	0.62	82	0.00	18	0.09	7	0.43	13	0.46	7	0.44
Cohen 1997		83	0.29	73	0.00	74	0.03	82	0.03	47	0.05	68	0.04
Cortot 1951		73	0.41	60	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	66	0.04	84	0.03
Csalog 1996		84	0.27	40	0.00	72	0.03	81	0.03	38	0.22	48	0.08
Czerny 1949		64	0.47	66	0.00	56	0.05	49	0.05	67	0.03	66	0.04
Czerny 1990		17	0.63	26	0.01	38	0.06	36	0.17	71	0.04	51	0.08
Duchoud 2007		22	0.63	56	0.00	25	0.05	22	0.32	38	0.18	27	0.24
Ezaki 2006		11	0.69	74	0.00	28	0.05	25	0.27	53	0.05	40	0.12
Falvay 1989		24	0.62	25	0.01	22	0.09	24	0.30	29	0.19	26	0.24
Farrell 1958		30	0.61	61	0.00	50	0.05	51	0.05	33	0.13	47	0.08
Ferenczy 1958		63	0.47	49	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	50	0.04	79	0.03
Fliere 1977		7	0.71	51	0.00	17	0.07	8	0.43	33	0.18	22	0.28
Fou 1978		19	0.63	28	0.01	20	0.06	17	0.38	25	0.35	15	0.36
Francois 1956		70	0.45	52	0.00	48	0.05	53	0.05	71	0.04	71	0.04
Friedman 1923		88	0.08	90	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	71	0.05	85	0.03
Friedman 1923b		87	0.08	85	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	68	0.05	82	0.03
Friedman 1930		85	0.22	62	0.00	82	0.02	85	0.02	56	0.05	78	0.03
Garcia 2007		51	0.52	55	0.00	41	0.05	44	0.11	14	0.38	31	0.20
Garcia 2007b		61	0.47	10	0.02	10	0.09	27	0.26	5	0.43	17	0.33
Gierzod 1998		32	0.61	39	0.00	23	0.06	28	0.25	31	0.19	28	0.22
Gornostaeva 1994		14	0.64	33	0.00	46	0.05	52	0.05	48	0.05	56	0.05
Groot 1988		50	0.52	54	0.00	63	0.04	65	0.04	72	0.03	83	0.03
Harasiewicz 1955		58	0.50	13	0.02	39	0.05	37	0.15	56	0.04	52	0.08
Hatto 1993		38	0.58	16	0.01	6	0.14	6	0.44	7	0.46	6	0.45
Hatto 1997		31	0.61	34	0.00	9	0.10	11	0.41	12	0.41	10	0.41
Horowitz 1949		59	0.50	48	0.00	60	0.03	71	0.03	62	0.04	75	0.03
Indjic 1988		37	0.59	37	0.00	7	0.10	9	0.43	7	0.49	5	0.46
Kapell 1951		44	0.54	41	0.00	62	0.04	64	0.04	48	0.05	59	0.04
Kissin 1993		18	0.63	44	0.00	24	0.09	20	0.33	20	0.35	16	0.34
Kushner 1989		9	0.70	24	0.01	13	0.08	10	0.42	17	0.36	12	0.39
Luisada 1991		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Lushtak 2004		41	0.56	77	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.12	44	0.09	44	0.10
Malcuzynski 1961		34	0.61	69	0.00	53	0.05	50	0.05	57	0.04	60	0.04
Magaloff 1978		26	0.62	22	0.01	36	0.06	31	0.24	71	0.03	46	0.08
Magin 1975		1	0.75	1	0.18	1	0.18	5	0.45	5	0.42	8	0.43
Michalowski 1933		78	0.40	46	0.00	42	0.07	38	0.15	37	0.22	34	0.18
Milkina 1970		21	0.63	5	0.06	12	0.08	13	0.40	19	0.36	13	0.38
Mohovich 1999		12	0.67	12	0.02	34	0.06	34	0.20	44	0.08	39	0.13
Moravec 1969		54	0.51	21	0.01	26	0.06	30	0.24	23	0.32	21	0.28
Morozova 2008		6	0.71	53	0.00	5	0.11	18	0.34	14	0.26	18	0.30
Neighaus 1950		20	0.63	27	0.01	27	0.06	21	0.33	43	0.13	29	0.21
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.41	50	0.00	64	0.04	59	0.04	24	0.24	43	0.10
Ohlsson 1999		8	0.70	7	0.04	11	0.09	2	0.50	11	0.48	2	0.49
Osinska 1989		39	0.58	30	0.01	32	0.05	41	0.12	33	0.17	37	0.14
Pachmann 1927		81	0.34	64	0.00	73	0.03	80	0.03	56	0.05	61	0.04
Paderewski 1930		67	0.45	80	0.00	78	0.03	74	0.03	77	0.02	86	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		47	0.53	29	0.01	61	0.03	70	0.03	78	0.03	72	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		15	0.64	67	0.00	29	0.06	29	0.24	20	0.29	24	0.26
Poblocka 1999		35	0.60	20	0.01	37	0.05	39	0.14	36	0.17	35	0.15
Rabcewiczowa 1932		55	0.51	83	0.00	65	0.04	62	0.04	51	0.05	58	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		57	0.50	68	0.00	51	0.05	48	0.05	71	0.03	57	0.04
Rangell 2001		36	0.59	23	0.01	31	0.06	26	0.26	20	0.26	25	0.26
Richter 1976		65	0.47	78	0.00	76	0.03	78	0.03	71	0.03	76	0.03
Rosen 1989		16	0.63	86	0.00	33	0.05	32	0.23	27	0.31	23	0.27
Rosenthal 1930		80	0.39	70	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.03	87	0.02
Rosenthal 1931		60	0.48	79	0.00	69	0.04	63	0.04	53	0.05	63	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		62	0.47	87	0.00	67	0.03	69	0.03	51	0.05	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		77	0.40	84	0.00	80	0.03	75	0.03	82	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931d		56	0.51	71	0.00	68	0.04	55	0.04	55	0.05	69	0.04
Rossi 2007		79	0.40	81	0.00	40	0.05	40	0.13	28	0.16	38	0.14
Rubinstein 1939		68	0.45	32	0.00	59	0.03	72	0.03	13	0.43	41	0.11
Rubinstein 1952		53	0.51	58	0.00	55	0.04	66	0.04	28	0.27	45	0.10
Rubinstein 1966		29	0.61	35	0.00	47	0.05	47	0.05	14	0.45	36	0.15
Schilhawsky 1960		71	0.45	88	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	62	0.04	64	0.04
Shebanova 2002		28	0.62	6	0.05	19	0.06	14	0.39	22	0.38	14	0.38
Smith 1975		5	0.71	19	0.01	14	0.11	12	0.40	44	0.10	30	0.20
Sokolov 2002		42	0.56	11	0.02	58	0.04	58	0.04	69	0.03	73	0.03
Sztompka 1959		69	0.45	63	0.00	79	0.03	76	0.03	54	0.05	62	0.04
Tomsic 1995		13	0.65	18	0.01	35	0.06	35	0.19	34	0.17	33	0.18
Uninsky 1932		76	0.40	45	0.00	86	0.04	61	0.04	70	0.04	65	0.04
Uninsky 1971		74	0.41	57	0.00	85	0.03	77	0.03	79	0.03	77	0.03
Wasowski 1980		46	0.54	15	0.01	30	0.06	33	0.22	31	0.14	32	0.18
Zak 1937		40	0.56	38	0.00	21	0.08	23	0.31	23	0.28	19	0.29
Zak 1951		45	0.54	9	0.02	15	0.06	19	0.33	29	0.26	20	0.29
Random 1		89	-0.03	75	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	74	0.03	88	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.20	72	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	79	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3		86	0.20	36	0.00	81	0.02	83	0.02	16	0.36	50	0.08

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).