Osinska 1989

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		5	0.77	45	0.00	11	0.09	5	0.47	14	0.35	8	0.41
Anderszewski 2003		72	0.44	65	0.00	72	0.04	51	0.04	73	0.03	80	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		48	0.58	74	0.00	40	0.05	40	0.13	67	0.03	58	0.06
Bacha 2000		63	0.49	60	0.00	53	0.04	66	0.04	33	0.20	44	0.09
Badura 1965		42	0.60	54	0.00	35	0.05	35	0.16	18	0.38	24	0.25
Barbosa 1983		54	0.55	69	0.00	50	0.05	50	0.05	44	0.17	45	0.09
Biret 1990		8	0.76	2	0.13	2	0.13	1	0.59	3	0.52	2	0.55
Blet 2003		34	0.64	57	0.00	41	0.04	44	0.08	65	0.04	57	0.06
Block 1995		41	0.61	44	0.00	58	0.04	60	0.04	27	0.24	43	0.10
Blumental 1952		67	0.47	9	0.02	19	0.08	21	0.30	12	0.33	18	0.31
Boshniakovich 1969		25	0.69	21	0.01	25	0.08	28	0.23	18	0.30	22	0.26
Brailowsky 1960		43	0.60	75	0.00	68	0.05	45	0.05	60	0.04	63	0.04
Bunin 1987		66	0.48	61	0.00	75	0.04	55	0.04	60	0.04	71	0.04
Bunin 1987b		65	0.48	66	0.00	74	0.04	73	0.04	79	0.03	75	0.03
Chiu 1999		61	0.50	67	0.00	47	0.04	64	0.04	43	0.10	56	0.06
Cohen 1997		75	0.41	25	0.01	61	0.04	53	0.04	15	0.40	37	0.13
Cortot 1951		16	0.72	18	0.01	17	0.12	7	0.42	2	0.54	4	0.48
Csalog 1996		50	0.56	40	0.00	64	0.04	59	0.04	15	0.44	36	0.13
Czerny 1949		2	0.79	1	0.17	1	0.17	3	0.55	10	0.51	3	0.53
Czerny 1990		1	0.81	20	0.01	6	0.09	6	0.46	26	0.25	17	0.34
Duchoud 2007		45	0.59	63	0.00	46	0.04	61	0.04	65	0.04	69	0.04
Ezaki 2006		18	0.71	23	0.01	31	0.08	17	0.34	58	0.04	38	0.12
Falvay 1989		19	0.71	53	0.00	28	0.07	26	0.25	35	0.15	31	0.19
Farrell 1958		35	0.63	13	0.01	23	0.07	27	0.24	6	0.37	19	0.30
Ferenczy 1958		44	0.60	19	0.01	39	0.05	36	0.16	29	0.28	29	0.21
Fliere 1977		6	0.76	62	0.00	15	0.11	11	0.38	43	0.12	28	0.21
Fou 1978		53	0.55	6	0.06	33	0.06	38	0.15	36	0.22	32	0.18
Francois 1956		15	0.73	12	0.02	9	0.09	9	0.39	18	0.31	14	0.35
Friedman 1923		87	0.05	81	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	74	0.05	84	0.03
Friedman 1923b		86	0.05	72	0.00	88	0.02	84	0.02	64	0.05	81	0.03
Friedman 1930		80	0.31	51	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	51	0.05	66	0.04
Garcia 2007		82	0.26	58	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	80	0.02	87	0.02
Garcia 2007b		85	0.13	84	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	72	0.03	89	0.02
Gierzod 1998		26	0.68	85	0.00	26	0.07	22	0.30	24	0.21	23	0.25
Gornostaeva 1994		3	0.78	10	0.02	10	0.10	12	0.38	18	0.32	13	0.35
Groot 1988		22	0.69	41	0.00	38	0.05	37	0.16	48	0.05	47	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		68	0.46	46	0.00	57	0.04	69	0.04	65	0.03	82	0.03
Hatto 1993		84	0.19	86	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	88	0.02	88	0.02
Hatto 1997		81	0.28	14	0.01	56	0.04	58	0.04	49	0.04	67	0.04
Horowitz 1949		60	0.52	43	0.00	67	0.04	57	0.04	72	0.03	76	0.03
Indjic 1988		83	0.20	87	0.00	79	0.04	67	0.04	83	0.02	78	0.03
Kapell 1951		24	0.69	77	0.00	30	0.07	30	0.21	32	0.27	25	0.24
Kissin 1993		20	0.70	33	0.00	29	0.06	23	0.29	32	0.23	21	0.26
Kushner 1989		4	0.78	7	0.02	7	0.08	15	0.37	22	0.32	15	0.34
Luisada 1991		49	0.58	8	0.02	21	0.07	33	0.17	41	0.12	35	0.14
Lushtak 2004		56	0.54	42	0.00	34	0.05	29	0.22	63	0.04	46	0.09
Malcuzynski 1961		13	0.74	28	0.01	20	0.08	19	0.32	32	0.18	26	0.24
Magaloff 1978		23	0.69	15	0.01	37	0.05	34	0.16	48	0.04	48	0.08
Magin 1975		74	0.43	29	0.00	77	0.03	82	0.03	77	0.02	86	0.02
Michalowski 1933		71	0.44	17	0.01	62	0.05	48	0.05	44	0.09	54	0.07
Milkina 1970		21	0.70	27	0.01	27	0.07	16	0.34	20	0.34	16	0.34
Mohovich 1999		27	0.67	34	0.00	42	0.04	39	0.13	38	0.11	39	0.12
Moravec 1969		12	0.74	24	0.01	13	0.12	14	0.38	5	0.53	5	0.45
Morozova 2008		39	0.62	49	0.00	8	0.08	25	0.26	29	0.16	30	0.20
Neighaus 1950		36	0.63	32	0.00	24	0.09	18	0.33	34	0.22	20	0.27
Niedzielski 1931		64	0.49	50	0.00	83	0.02	83	0.02	65	0.03	85	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		32	0.64	36	0.00	45	0.04	56	0.04	43	0.12	53	0.07
Osinska 1989		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Pachmann 1927		76	0.39	88	0.00	73	0.03	74	0.03	58	0.04	77	0.03
Paderewski 1930		14	0.73	4	0.10	4	0.12	13	0.38	6	0.44	7	0.41
Perlemuter 1992		58	0.53	35	0.00	66	0.04	62	0.04	82	0.03	73	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		30	0.67	70	0.00	52	0.05	47	0.05	40	0.10	51	0.07
Poblocka 1999		10	0.74	31	0.00	16	0.09	8	0.42	18	0.40	6	0.41
Rabcewiczowa 1932		9	0.75	68	0.00	14	0.12	10	0.38	16	0.41	9	0.39
Rachmaninoff 1923		73	0.44	82	0.00	70	0.03	77	0.03	52	0.04	74	0.03
Rangell 2001		37	0.63	30	0.00	32	0.07	31	0.20	39	0.14	33	0.17
Richter 1976		59	0.52	55	0.00	69	0.04	70	0.04	44	0.07	59	0.05
Rosen 1989		7	0.76	3	0.10	3	0.14	2	0.58	3	0.64	1	0.61
Rosenthal 1930		47	0.58	47	0.00	63	0.04	71	0.04	56	0.04	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		77	0.38	83	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	62	0.04	79	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		78	0.35	89	0.00	82	0.03	78	0.03	63	0.04	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		46	0.58	64	0.00	60	0.05	49	0.05	49	0.06	62	0.05
Rosenthal 1931d		70	0.45	78	0.00	81	0.04	68	0.04	61	0.04	72	0.04
Rossi 2007		69	0.46	37	0.00	51	0.04	54	0.04	13	0.25	41	0.10
Rubinstein 1939		79	0.31	48	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	27	0.34	42	0.10
Rubinstein 1952		33	0.64	26	0.01	48	0.05	46	0.05	22	0.43	34	0.15
Rubinstein 1966		31	0.64	22	0.01	22	0.09	24	0.27	11	0.48	12	0.36
Schilhawsky 1960		51	0.56	59	0.00	59	0.04	52	0.04	48	0.06	60	0.05
Shebanova 2002		17	0.71	52	0.00	18	0.07	20	0.31	16	0.46	10	0.38
Smith 1975		11	0.74	5	0.07	5	0.14	4	0.53	18	0.26	11	0.37
Sokolov 2002		40	0.62	11	0.02	12	0.08	41	0.13	53	0.04	50	0.07
Sztompka 1959		28	0.67	39	0.00	36	0.05	32	0.20	31	0.29	27	0.24
Tomsic 1995		38	0.62	79	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.11	60	0.04	52	0.07
Uninsky 1932		62	0.49	56	0.00	65	0.03	76	0.03	51	0.05	68	0.04
Uninsky 1971		52	0.56	16	0.01	44	0.05	43	0.09	56	0.05	55	0.07
Wasowski 1980		29	0.67	38	0.00	49	0.04	63	0.04	12	0.32	40	0.11
Zak 1937		55	0.55	73	0.00	54	0.04	72	0.04	59	0.05	64	0.04
Zak 1951		57	0.54	71	0.00	55	0.04	65	0.04	49	0.05	65	0.04
Random 1		90	-0.19	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		89	0.00	76	0.00	89	0.02	86	0.02	18	0.30	49	0.08
Random 3		88	0.04	80	0.00	86	0.02	89	0.02	38	0.13	61	0.05

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).