Garcia 2007

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