Francois 1956

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		35	0.25	74	0.00	34	0.10	32	0.38	62	0.04	38	0.12
Anderszewski 2003		50	0.21	62	0.00	38	0.07	42	0.20	38	0.16	30	0.18
Ashkenazy 1981		74	0.14	63	0.00	78	0.03	73	0.03	82	0.03	76	0.03
Bacha 2000		64	0.17	83	0.00	45	0.06	51	0.06	47	0.06	48	0.06
Badura 1965		82	0.10	30	0.00	82	0.02	84	0.02	86	0.03	88	0.02
Barbosa 1983		41	0.23	33	0.00	43	0.07	43	0.16	64	0.05	44	0.09
Biret 1990		8	0.43	2	0.15	4	0.28	11	0.70	3	0.79	6	0.74
Blet 2003		33	0.26	48	0.00	37	0.07	38	0.30	57	0.06	36	0.13
Block 1995		32	0.26	64	0.00	42	0.10	39	0.25	64	0.05	41	0.11
Blumental 1952		85	0.07	61	0.00	72	0.03	72	0.03	59	0.05	64	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		66	0.16	19	0.00	56	0.04	60	0.04	83	0.03	75	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		45	0.22	59	0.00	55	0.06	49	0.06	54	0.06	49	0.06
Bunin 1987		48	0.21	9	0.01	52	0.06	54	0.06	62	0.05	57	0.05
Bunin 1987b		47	0.21	55	0.00	53	0.06	55	0.06	60	0.05	55	0.05
Chiu 1999		43	0.22	57	0.00	61	0.04	62	0.04	77	0.04	60	0.04
Cohen 1997		1	0.52	3	0.12	2	0.23	1	0.84	3	0.75	3	0.79
Cortot 1951		18	0.34	7	0.03	23	0.15	19	0.58	17	0.54	13	0.56
Csalog 1996		69	0.16	75	0.00	81	0.02	83	0.02	76	0.04	68	0.03
Czerny 1949		3	0.49	1	0.40	1	0.39	3	0.81	2	0.87	1	0.84
Czerny 1990		80	0.11	76	0.00	79	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.02	90	0.02
Duchoud 2007		38	0.25	45	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	65	0.05	45	0.08
Ezaki 2006		10	0.41	36	0.00	12	0.16	10	0.72	19	0.62	10	0.67
Falvay 1989		25	0.32	21	0.00	21	0.16	18	0.59	11	0.45	18	0.52
Farrell 1958		31	0.27	10	0.01	33	0.11	27	0.46	33	0.30	26	0.37
Ferenczy 1958		28	0.31	40	0.00	24	0.16	23	0.52	20	0.71	12	0.61
Fliere 1977		53	0.20	84	0.00	67	0.04	64	0.04	72	0.04	58	0.04
Fou 1978		52	0.20	34	0.00	46	0.06	53	0.06	83	0.03	62	0.04
Francois 1956		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1923		75	0.11	77	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	71	0.04	79	0.03
Friedman 1923b		76	0.11	85	0.00	85	0.02	82	0.02	68	0.04	77	0.03
Friedman 1930		62	0.17	46	0.00	64	0.03	66	0.03	79	0.03	71	0.03
Garcia 2007		84	0.09	78	0.00	69	0.03	70	0.03	79	0.03	74	0.03
Garcia 2007b		78	0.11	79	0.00	77	0.03	67	0.03	75	0.04	78	0.03
Gierzod 1998		87	0.03	69	0.00	60	0.04	65	0.04	77	0.02	73	0.03
Gornostaeva 1994		4	0.48	5	0.06	5	0.26	4	0.78	7	0.77	4	0.77
Groot 1988		29	0.31	37	0.00	28	0.12	30	0.41	55	0.07	31	0.17
Harasiewicz 1955		7	0.44	25	0.00	9	0.15	14	0.67	17	0.46	14	0.56
Hatto 1993		46	0.22	72	0.00	49	0.07	47	0.07	66	0.06	52	0.06
Hatto 1997		15	0.35	17	0.00	15	0.16	13	0.67	20	0.37	20	0.50
Horowitz 1949		65	0.16	38	0.00	62	0.03	69	0.03	72	0.04	67	0.03
Indjic 1988		54	0.19	58	0.00	50	0.06	48	0.06	70	0.05	56	0.05
Kapell 1951		49	0.21	22	0.00	47	0.06	52	0.06	70	0.05	54	0.05
Kissin 1993		89	0.00	73	0.00	89	0.02	86	0.02	83	0.03	86	0.02
Kushner 1989		72	0.15	49	0.00	75	0.02	77	0.02	85	0.02	81	0.02
Luisada 1991		40	0.24	31	0.00	51	0.06	50	0.06	73	0.04	53	0.05
Lushtak 2004		60	0.18	52	0.00	57	0.04	58	0.04	67	0.05	63	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		68	0.16	80	0.00	65	0.03	68	0.03	81	0.03	65	0.03
Magaloff 1978		30	0.30	56	0.00	40	0.06	40	0.22	66	0.04	42	0.09
Magin 1975		57	0.19	43	0.00	59	0.04	61	0.04	47	0.09	50	0.06
Michalowski 1933		42	0.23	23	0.00	54	0.07	46	0.07	69	0.05	51	0.06
Milkina 1970		14	0.39	11	0.01	11	0.19	8	0.73	9	0.65	8	0.69
Mohovich 1999		21	0.33	26	0.00	20	0.12	20	0.56	28	0.31	23	0.42
Moravec 1969		20	0.33	14	0.01	19	0.14	22	0.54	30	0.26	25	0.37
Morozova 2008		56	0.19	29	0.00	63	0.04	63	0.04	85	0.03	70	0.03
Neighaus 1950		9	0.42	15	0.00	10	0.16	9	0.73	26	0.33	21	0.49
Niedzielski 1931		77	0.11	28	0.00	83	0.02	87	0.02	82	0.03	80	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		16	0.35	35	0.00	29	0.10	34	0.35	64	0.04	37	0.12
Osinska 1989		5	0.45	18	0.00	8	0.16	7	0.73	12	0.67	7	0.70
Pachmann 1927		70	0.15	54	0.00	86	0.02	81	0.02	84	0.03	84	0.02
Paderewski 1930		58	0.18	86	0.00	48	0.08	45	0.08	61	0.06	46	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		26	0.32	65	0.00	35	0.08	36	0.31	63	0.04	39	0.11
Pierdomenico 2008		55	0.19	81	0.00	58	0.05	56	0.05	65	0.04	61	0.04
Poblocka 1999		39	0.24	50	0.00	32	0.09	31	0.40	48	0.06	33	0.15
Rabcewiczowa 1932		6	0.44	6	0.03	6	0.21	6	0.75	8	0.75	5	0.75
Rachmaninoff 1923		36	0.25	66	0.00	41	0.07	41	0.20	67	0.04	43	0.09
Rangell 2001		44	0.22	39	0.00	30	0.08	29	0.41	61	0.05	35	0.14
Richter 1976		79	0.11	47	0.00	80	0.02	80	0.02	84	0.03	83	0.02
Rosen 1989		23	0.32	70	0.00	25	0.12	24	0.52	46	0.05	32	0.16
Rosenthal 1930		34	0.26	44	0.00	39	0.06	37	0.30	38	0.27	28	0.28
Rosenthal 1931		63	0.17	67	0.00	31	0.11	33	0.36	32	0.46	24	0.41
Rosenthal 1931b		51	0.20	13	0.01	26	0.13	28	0.42	24	0.50	22	0.46
Rosenthal 1931c		22	0.32	12	0.01	17	0.16	21	0.55	16	0.54	16	0.54
Rosenthal 1931d		37	0.25	41	0.00	22	0.14	25	0.51	14	0.54	19	0.52
Rossi 2007		71	0.15	51	0.00	71	0.03	71	0.03	50	0.05	59	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		24	0.32	60	0.00	27	0.11	26	0.48	41	0.12	29	0.24
Rubinstein 1952		11	0.41	8	0.02	7	0.16	5	0.75	7	0.63	9	0.69
Rubinstein 1966		19	0.33	53	0.00	18	0.11	17	0.61	34	0.16	27	0.31
Schilhawsky 1960		61	0.18	32	0.00	73	0.03	75	0.03	76	0.04	69	0.03
Shebanova 2002		83	0.09	24	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	86	0.03	87	0.02
Smith 1975		2	0.50	4	0.08	3	0.27	2	0.81	5	0.80	2	0.80
Sokolov 2002		13	0.40	27	0.00	13	0.15	12	0.69	9	0.56	11	0.62
Sztompka 1959		67	0.16	82	0.00	74	0.02	79	0.02	79	0.03	85	0.02
Tomsic 1995		17	0.34	16	0.00	14	0.17	16	0.65	11	0.47	15	0.55
Uninsky 1932		59	0.18	87	0.00	66	0.04	59	0.04	84	0.03	72	0.03
Uninsky 1971		12	0.40	20	0.00	16	0.18	15	0.66	16	0.42	17	0.53
Wasowski 1980		27	0.31	88	0.00	36	0.08	35	0.33	57	0.06	34	0.14
Zak 1937		81	0.10	89	0.00	76	0.02	78	0.02	78	0.03	82	0.02
Zak 1951		73	0.14	71	0.00	68	0.04	57	0.04	73	0.03	66	0.03
Random 1		90	-0.03	68	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	67	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		86	0.04	90	0.00	70	0.03	74	0.03	16	0.42	40	0.11
Random 3		88	0.01	42	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	14	0.43	47	0.07

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).