Bunin 1987b

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		27	0.63	4	0.00	34	0.07	36	0.21	43	0.09	41	0.14
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.59	5	0.00	24	0.08	26	0.33	17	0.39	22	0.36
Ashkenazy 1981		33	0.62	6	0.00	39	0.07	39	0.16	54	0.04	52	0.08
Bacha 2000		81	0.36	7	0.00	87	0.03	81	0.03	80	0.02	86	0.02
Badura 1965		58	0.51	8	0.00	51	0.05	55	0.05	37	0.21	48	0.10
Barbosa 1983		28	0.63	9	0.00	27	0.07	33	0.26	19	0.39	26	0.32
Biret 1990		39	0.61	10	0.00	52	0.04	60	0.04	54	0.04	68	0.04
Blet 2003		7	0.75	11	0.00	12	0.12	10	0.46	13	0.40	10	0.43
Block 1995		76	0.39	12	0.00	60	0.03	72	0.03	63	0.04	81	0.03
Blumental 1952		78	0.38	13	0.00	78	0.04	69	0.04	63	0.04	66	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		47	0.57	14	0.00	62	0.03	74	0.03	56	0.04	83	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		51	0.56	15	0.00	65	0.04	62	0.04	56	0.05	60	0.04
Bunin 1987		1	1.00	1	1.00	1	0.99	0	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Bunin 1987b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Chiu 1999		69	0.47	16	0.00	67	0.04	61	0.04	50	0.05	61	0.04
Cohen 1997		88	0.22	17	0.00	81	0.02	85	0.02	59	0.04	84	0.03
Cortot 1951		49	0.56	18	0.00	53	0.05	51	0.05	43	0.16	50	0.09
Csalog 1996		85	0.28	19	0.00	88	0.03	82	0.03	64	0.03	78	0.03
Czerny 1949		24	0.65	20	0.00	29	0.06	25	0.34	26	0.31	28	0.32
Czerny 1990		17	0.69	21	0.00	23	0.10	21	0.37	35	0.20	32	0.27
Duchoud 2007		22	0.67	22	0.00	30	0.07	23	0.36	22	0.41	18	0.38
Ezaki 2006		6	0.76	23	0.00	8	0.16	7	0.49	17	0.38	8	0.43
Falvay 1989		46	0.57	24	0.00	64	0.04	59	0.04	49	0.05	62	0.04
Farrell 1958		35	0.62	25	0.00	58	0.05	49	0.05	30	0.18	49	0.09
Ferenczy 1958		23	0.66	26	0.00	36	0.06	32	0.27	8	0.49	24	0.36
Fliere 1977		11	0.71	27	0.00	16	0.07	20	0.38	37	0.14	33	0.23
Fou 1978		55	0.53	28	0.00	66	0.04	65	0.04	47	0.08	56	0.06
Francois 1956		32	0.62	29	0.00	35	0.08	37	0.19	46	0.07	46	0.12
Friedman 1923		84	0.29	30	0.00	55	0.04	63	0.04	14	0.43	42	0.13
Friedman 1923b		83	0.30	31	0.00	54	0.05	54	0.05	12	0.43	40	0.15
Friedman 1930		64	0.48	32	0.00	28	0.06	28	0.30	11	0.43	23	0.36
Garcia 2007		70	0.46	33	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	20	0.34	47	0.10
Garcia 2007b		87	0.28	34	0.00	70	0.03	79	0.03	46	0.06	69	0.04
Gierzod 1998		45	0.57	35	0.00	63	0.04	64	0.04	79	0.03	80	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		38	0.61	36	0.00	48	0.05	52	0.05	69	0.03	67	0.04
Groot 1988		18	0.69	37	0.00	14	0.07	19	0.38	29	0.24	29	0.30
Harasiewicz 1955		25	0.64	38	0.00	3	0.18	8	0.49	4	0.46	6	0.47
Hatto 1993		68	0.47	39	0.00	47	0.05	48	0.05	23	0.29	44	0.12
Hatto 1997		43	0.58	40	0.00	33	0.06	31	0.27	15	0.39	27	0.32
Horowitz 1949		50	0.56	41	0.00	59	0.05	47	0.05	41	0.11	54	0.07
Indjic 1988		59	0.51	42	0.00	42	0.06	44	0.11	18	0.37	36	0.20
Kapell 1951		12	0.71	43	0.00	18	0.07	13	0.43	16	0.44	9	0.43
Kissin 1993		71	0.45	44	0.00	79	0.04	68	0.04	89	0.02	77	0.03
Kushner 1989		53	0.54	45	0.00	68	0.05	50	0.05	64	0.04	64	0.04
Luisada 1991		54	0.53	46	0.00	72	0.03	78	0.03	61	0.04	70	0.03
Lushtak 2004		3	0.78	47	0.00	4	0.14	3	0.58	4	0.60	2	0.59
Malcuzynski 1961		15	0.71	48	0.00	20	0.08	11	0.45	32	0.18	31	0.28
Magaloff 1978		34	0.62	49	0.00	26	0.07	34	0.24	46	0.06	43	0.12
Magin 1975		66	0.47	50	0.00	69	0.04	67	0.04	54	0.04	63	0.04
Michalowski 1933		74	0.43	51	0.00	38	0.07	35	0.23	26	0.37	30	0.29
Milkina 1970		73	0.44	52	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	77	0.03	76	0.03
Mohovich 1999		8	0.74	53	0.00	10	0.10	14	0.43	20	0.36	16	0.39
Moravec 1969		75	0.40	54	0.00	83	0.02	86	0.02	85	0.02	87	0.02
Morozova 2008		30	0.63	55	0.00	25	0.07	30	0.27	19	0.20	34	0.23
Neighaus 1950		14	0.71	56	0.00	15	0.07	12	0.45	27	0.32	19	0.38
Niedzielski 1931		79	0.37	57	0.00	80	0.03	71	0.03	63	0.03	75	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.61	58	0.00	50	0.04	56	0.04	48	0.06	57	0.05
Osinska 1989		63	0.48	59	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	74	0.03	71	0.03
Pachmann 1927		44	0.58	60	0.00	9	0.10	27	0.31	11	0.51	13	0.40
Paderewski 1930		48	0.57	61	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.12	20	0.26	39	0.18
Perlemuter 1992		20	0.68	62	0.00	19	0.07	16	0.42	12	0.42	11	0.42
Pierdomenico 2008		67	0.47	63	0.00	73	0.04	66	0.04	78	0.03	73	0.03
Poblocka 1999		31	0.62	2	0.00	41	0.05	41	0.12	68	0.03	55	0.06
Rabcewiczowa 1932		52	0.56	64	0.00	49	0.04	57	0.04	42	0.12	53	0.07
Rachmaninoff 1923		19	0.68	65	0.00	13	0.09	15	0.43	13	0.38	12	0.40
Rangell 2001		72	0.44	66	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	76	0.03	85	0.03
Richter 1976		36	0.61	67	0.00	32	0.08	24	0.35	7	0.42	17	0.38
Rosen 1989		65	0.47	68	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	54	0.04	82	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		26	0.63	3	0.00	31	0.07	29	0.30	14	0.46	20	0.37
Rosenthal 1931		56	0.52	69	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.12	26	0.33	37	0.20
Rosenthal 1931b		62	0.49	70	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.09	33	0.17	45	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		42	0.59	71	0.00	40	0.07	38	0.16	24	0.30	35	0.22
Rosenthal 1931d		60	0.49	72	0.00	46	0.05	46	0.05	48	0.05	58	0.05
Rossi 2007		86	0.28	73	0.00	74	0.03	77	0.03	47	0.04	72	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		82	0.31	74	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	57	0.05	74	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		77	0.38	75	0.00	84	0.02	87	0.02	76	0.03	90	0.02
Rubinstein 1966		57	0.52	76	0.00	77	0.03	70	0.03	55	0.05	65	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		9	0.74	77	0.00	6	0.19	4	0.56	4	0.56	4	0.56
Shebanova 2002		80	0.36	78	0.00	85	0.02	84	0.02	84	0.03	88	0.02
Smith 1975		10	0.73	79	0.00	11	0.09	9	0.46	23	0.26	25	0.35
Sokolov 2002		4	0.77	80	0.00	7	0.19	6	0.51	14	0.44	5	0.47
Sztompka 1959		16	0.69	81	0.00	22	0.08	17	0.41	20	0.39	14	0.40
Tomsic 1995		13	0.71	82	0.00	21	0.09	22	0.36	20	0.36	21	0.36
Uninsky 1932		21	0.67	83	0.00	17	0.07	18	0.41	6	0.50	7	0.45
Uninsky 1971		5	0.77	84	0.00	2	0.18	5	0.55	2	0.58	3	0.56
Wasowski 1980		61	0.49	85	0.00	56	0.04	58	0.04	64	0.04	59	0.04
Zak 1937		40	0.60	86	0.00	57	0.05	53	0.05	42	0.14	51	0.08
Zak 1951		29	0.63	87	0.00	37	0.07	40	0.15	32	0.25	38	0.19
Average		2	0.81	88	0.00	5	0.13	2	0.58	26	0.28	15	0.40
Random 1		89	-0.05	89	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	52	0.05	89	0.02
Random 2		91	-0.13	90	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	50	0.04	79	0.03
Random 3		90	-0.06	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	77	0.02	91	0.01

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).