Mohovich 1999

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	0.76	57	0.00	20	0.10	20	0.36	18	0.32	20	0.34
Anderszewski 2003		67	0.53	42	0.00	33	0.05	39	0.11	25	0.26	36	0.17
Ashkenazy 1981		56	0.60	68	0.00	63	0.04	59	0.04	73	0.03	84	0.03
Bacha 2000		51	0.62	73	0.00	62	0.03	71	0.03	24	0.31	47	0.10
Badura 1965		72	0.50	83	0.00	69	0.03	63	0.03	48	0.05	74	0.04
Barbosa 1983		50	0.62	7	0.03	24	0.09	25	0.26	12	0.43	21	0.33
Biret 1990		42	0.65	60	0.00	72	0.04	48	0.04	51	0.04	77	0.04
Blet 2003		15	0.76	40	0.00	25	0.08	15	0.37	9	0.43	14	0.40
Block 1995		44	0.64	20	0.01	52	0.05	47	0.05	16	0.31	42	0.12
Blumental 1952		78	0.32	32	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		29	0.69	22	0.01	31	0.06	29	0.17	17	0.32	29	0.23
Brailowsky 1960		24	0.71	19	0.01	45	0.04	53	0.04	24	0.30	43	0.11
Bunin 1987		19	0.74	82	0.00	22	0.09	18	0.36	13	0.43	16	0.39
Bunin 1987b		18	0.74	52	0.00	23	0.09	19	0.36	13	0.43	15	0.39
Chiu 1999		63	0.57	56	0.00	47	0.05	45	0.05	28	0.24	44	0.11
Cohen 1997		83	0.28	76	0.00	82	0.03	73	0.03	49	0.05	75	0.04
Cortot 1951		74	0.49	69	0.00	81	0.03	65	0.03	63	0.04	86	0.03
Csalog 1996		69	0.52	51	0.00	80	0.03	83	0.03	45	0.09	64	0.05
Czerny 1949		35	0.66	15	0.01	34	0.05	30	0.16	30	0.25	34	0.20
Czerny 1990		11	0.77	67	0.00	18	0.08	17	0.36	23	0.27	26	0.31
Duchoud 2007		57	0.60	34	0.00	64	0.04	60	0.04	55	0.04	73	0.04
Ezaki 2006		3	0.84	4	0.09	4	0.15	1	0.62	6	0.54	3	0.58
Falvay 1989		5	0.81	70	0.00	12	0.10	10	0.46	11	0.42	11	0.44
Farrell 1958		46	0.64	23	0.01	73	0.04	49	0.04	47	0.05	69	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		45	0.64	26	0.01	56	0.03	72	0.03	24	0.33	49	0.10
Fliere 1977		7	0.79	45	0.00	17	0.08	13	0.40	23	0.24	23	0.31
Fou 1978		25	0.71	59	0.00	21	0.09	22	0.34	22	0.36	19	0.35
Francois 1956		16	0.74	21	0.01	14	0.06	21	0.36	11	0.38	18	0.37
Friedman 1923		87	0.05	86	0.00	87	0.03	82	0.03	72	0.05	78	0.04
Friedman 1923b		86	0.06	87	0.00	86	0.03	81	0.03	67	0.05	76	0.04
Friedman 1930		84	0.26	88	0.00	74	0.04	54	0.04	37	0.14	59	0.07
Garcia 2007		75	0.44	33	0.00	77	0.02	87	0.02	36	0.19	63	0.06
Garcia 2007b		85	0.18	54	0.00	84	0.03	76	0.03	52	0.04	87	0.03
Gierzod 1998		40	0.66	25	0.01	61	0.03	78	0.03	53	0.04	82	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		9	0.78	16	0.01	15	0.07	16	0.37	12	0.39	17	0.38
Groot 1988		2	0.86	1	0.17	1	0.16	3	0.58	2	0.64	2	0.61
Harasiewicz 1955		55	0.61	3	0.14	3	0.13	9	0.46	5	0.45	10	0.45
Hatto 1993		80	0.29	63	0.00	59	0.03	77	0.03	67	0.03	85	0.03
Hatto 1997		76	0.40	11	0.02	32	0.05	37	0.11	35	0.12	46	0.11
Horowitz 1949		41	0.66	58	0.00	19	0.09	26	0.25	10	0.40	22	0.32
Indjic 1988		77	0.33	64	0.00	57	0.03	74	0.03	57	0.03	81	0.03
Kapell 1951		38	0.66	89	0.00	65	0.04	50	0.04	40	0.16	53	0.08
Kissin 1993		21	0.73	77	0.00	26	0.09	24	0.28	25	0.27	28	0.27
Kushner 1989		31	0.68	55	0.00	50	0.04	52	0.04	50	0.05	70	0.04
Luisada 1991		33	0.67	10	0.02	36	0.04	44	0.08	34	0.20	38	0.13
Lushtak 2004		28	0.69	5	0.06	9	0.10	6	0.52	13	0.44	8	0.48
Malcuzynski 1961		4	0.81	71	0.00	11	0.10	11	0.45	17	0.37	13	0.41
Magaloff 1978		10	0.77	12	0.01	10	0.09	8	0.46	18	0.39	12	0.42
Magin 1975		66	0.56	46	0.00	70	0.04	58	0.04	40	0.12	58	0.07
Michalowski 1933		81	0.29	61	0.00	75	0.03	66	0.03	51	0.05	72	0.04
Milkina 1970		26	0.71	36	0.00	44	0.04	43	0.08	42	0.15	45	0.11
Mohovich 1999		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Moravec 1969		62	0.57	50	0.00	79	0.03	86	0.03	59	0.04	79	0.03
Morozova 2008		60	0.58	84	0.00	38	0.04	40	0.10	53	0.04	62	0.06
Neighaus 1950		6	0.80	13	0.01	5	0.12	4	0.56	4	0.56	5	0.56
Niedzielski 1931		71	0.51	81	0.00	78	0.03	79	0.03	47	0.05	68	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		47	0.63	28	0.00	55	0.03	75	0.03	51	0.06	71	0.04
Osinska 1989		32	0.67	35	0.00	42	0.05	38	0.11	39	0.13	40	0.12
Pachmann 1927		43	0.64	43	0.00	30	0.06	28	0.18	7	0.54	24	0.31
Paderewski 1930		49	0.63	29	0.00	68	0.03	67	0.03	35	0.13	60	0.06
Perlemuter 1992		8	0.78	9	0.02	6	0.16	5	0.53	1	0.64	4	0.58
Pierdomenico 2008		36	0.66	65	0.00	39	0.04	34	0.13	19	0.30	32	0.20
Poblocka 1999		22	0.72	31	0.00	41	0.04	35	0.12	32	0.21	37	0.16
Rabcewiczowa 1932		48	0.63	37	0.00	51	0.04	51	0.04	28	0.23	48	0.10
Rachmaninoff 1923		65	0.57	38	0.00	27	0.07	32	0.15	23	0.27	31	0.20
Rangell 2001		30	0.69	39	0.00	46	0.05	46	0.05	10	0.35	39	0.13
Richter 1976		37	0.66	72	0.00	40	0.05	33	0.13	17	0.30	33	0.20
Rosen 1989		23	0.72	24	0.01	28	0.08	27	0.21	12	0.46	25	0.31
Rosenthal 1930		64	0.57	78	0.00	71	0.03	68	0.03	35	0.20	55	0.08
Rosenthal 1931		70	0.52	18	0.01	37	0.04	41	0.09	13	0.41	35	0.19
Rosenthal 1931b		73	0.50	80	0.00	60	0.03	80	0.03	27	0.23	56	0.08
Rosenthal 1931c		58	0.59	47	0.00	66	0.03	64	0.03	31	0.21	57	0.08
Rosenthal 1931d		61	0.57	41	0.00	58	0.03	69	0.03	17	0.35	50	0.10
Rossi 2007		79	0.32	74	0.00	76	0.03	70	0.03	43	0.06	67	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		82	0.29	79	0.00	85	0.03	84	0.03	70	0.04	80	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		27	0.70	30	0.00	29	0.07	36	0.12	21	0.43	30	0.23
Rubinstein 1966		20	0.73	8	0.03	13	0.08	14	0.38	2	0.65	6	0.50
Schilhawsky 1960		52	0.62	66	0.00	43	0.04	42	0.08	51	0.05	61	0.06
Shebanova 2002		54	0.61	17	0.01	53	0.04	62	0.04	48	0.06	65	0.05
Smith 1975		17	0.74	27	0.01	16	0.08	23	0.33	20	0.26	27	0.29
Sokolov 2002		39	0.66	44	0.00	67	0.04	56	0.04	60	0.04	66	0.04
Sztompka 1959		53	0.62	49	0.00	54	0.04	61	0.04	39	0.16	54	0.08
Tomsic 1995		1	0.87	2	0.15	2	0.25	2	0.58	1	0.65	1	0.61
Uninsky 1932		59	0.58	48	0.00	49	0.04	57	0.04	33	0.22	52	0.09
Uninsky 1971		34	0.67	53	0.00	48	0.04	55	0.04	28	0.35	41	0.12
Wasowski 1980		68	0.52	90	0.00	35	0.04	31	0.16	48	0.05	51	0.09
Zak 1937		14	0.76	6	0.06	8	0.11	12	0.42	5	0.49	9	0.45
Zak 1951		12	0.77	14	0.01	7	0.15	7	0.47	5	0.50	7	0.48
Random 1		89	-0.14	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	80	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.22	62	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	89	0.02	88	0.02
Random 3		88	-0.01	75	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	81	0.02	90	0.02

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).