Friedman 1923b

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

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).