Badura 1965

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

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).