Barbosa 1983

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		20	0.39	23	0.01	20	0.07	22	0.43	29	0.37	20	0.40
Anderszewski 2003		33	0.34	72	0.00	29	0.10	28	0.37	14	0.53	17	0.44
Ashkenazy 1981		21	0.38	59	0.00	24	0.08	21	0.44	64	0.06	33	0.16
Bacha 2000		49	0.29	61	0.00	53	0.05	60	0.05	31	0.28	37	0.12
Badura 1965		78	0.17	55	0.00	75	0.03	78	0.03	64	0.04	85	0.03
Barbosa 1983		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Biret 1990		60	0.25	73	0.00	66	0.05	59	0.05	40	0.27	38	0.12
Blet 2003		12	0.42	50	0.00	12	0.14	7	0.67	11	0.65	3	0.66
Block 1995		47	0.30	7	0.03	26	0.09	30	0.35	39	0.18	28	0.25
Blumental 1952		32	0.34	43	0.00	47	0.05	64	0.05	43	0.13	55	0.08
Boshniakovich 1969		10	0.42	29	0.00	8	0.16	6	0.67	14	0.57	6	0.62
Brailowsky 1960		77	0.19	66	0.00	80	0.04	72	0.04	65	0.05	73	0.04
Bunin 1987		35	0.33	10	0.02	31	0.09	27	0.37	28	0.43	21	0.40
Bunin 1987b		36	0.33	19	0.01	32	0.09	29	0.36	25	0.41	22	0.38
Chiu 1999		6	0.44	30	0.00	22	0.08	18	0.50	45	0.15	26	0.27
Cohen 1997		62	0.25	37	0.00	62	0.05	55	0.05	56	0.06	69	0.05
Cortot 1951		82	0.15	45	0.00	81	0.04	73	0.04	81	0.02	87	0.03
Csalog 1996		76	0.19	85	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	73	0.04	82	0.03
Czerny 1949		89	0.04	74	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	74	0.04	83	0.03
Czerny 1990		41	0.32	40	0.00	50	0.05	54	0.05	43	0.21	47	0.10
Duchoud 2007		54	0.27	41	0.00	63	0.05	62	0.05	63	0.05	67	0.05
Ezaki 2006		58	0.26	81	0.00	60	0.04	70	0.04	50	0.07	58	0.05
Falvay 1989		65	0.24	75	0.00	42	0.05	43	0.13	52	0.06	48	0.09
Farrell 1958		63	0.25	53	0.00	39	0.07	40	0.13	48	0.07	44	0.10
Ferenczy 1958		84	0.15	78	0.00	78	0.04	75	0.04	40	0.33	42	0.11
Fliere 1977		34	0.33	47	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.10	74	0.04	56	0.06
Fou 1978		46	0.31	67	0.00	41	0.06	42	0.13	49	0.05	53	0.08
Francois 1956		67	0.23	35	0.00	68	0.05	65	0.05	44	0.16	52	0.09
Friedman 1923		53	0.28	68	0.00	65	0.06	53	0.06	58	0.07	57	0.06
Friedman 1923b		56	0.27	88	0.00	64	0.05	66	0.05	65	0.06	70	0.05
Friedman 1930		39	0.32	82	0.00	43	0.06	41	0.13	57	0.06	50	0.09
Garcia 2007		17	0.41	2	0.09	5	0.14	10	0.63	11	0.61	5	0.62
Garcia 2007b		28	0.35	63	0.00	25	0.09	20	0.47	16	0.59	14	0.53
Gierzod 1998		73	0.20	89	0.00	70	0.05	57	0.05	55	0.06	66	0.05
Gornostaeva 1994		74	0.20	86	0.00	72	0.03	84	0.03	55	0.05	78	0.04
Groot 1988		30	0.34	20	0.01	27	0.08	19	0.49	67	0.05	34	0.16
Harasiewicz 1955		11	0.42	9	0.02	13	0.09	25	0.40	41	0.15	30	0.24
Hatto 1993		5	0.44	18	0.01	4	0.13	4	0.72	16	0.53	7	0.62
Hatto 1997		18	0.40	36	0.00	10	0.12	11	0.63	11	0.53	12	0.58
Horowitz 1949		22	0.38	25	0.01	19	0.08	12	0.59	19	0.57	11	0.58
Indjic 1988		4	0.47	3	0.07	2	0.14	3	0.73	12	0.63	2	0.68
Kapell 1951		9	0.43	15	0.01	9	0.19	9	0.64	12	0.49	13	0.56
Kissin 1993		45	0.31	56	0.00	37	0.08	36	0.21	44	0.28	29	0.24
Kushner 1989		43	0.31	83	0.00	57	0.06	51	0.06	58	0.05	61	0.05
Luisada 1991		3	0.48	12	0.01	3	0.14	2	0.74	10	0.70	1	0.72
Lushtak 2004		8	0.43	6	0.05	15	0.09	32	0.32	19	0.39	23	0.35
Malcuzynski 1961		26	0.35	28	0.00	38	0.07	38	0.19	56	0.05	45	0.10
Magaloff 1978		72	0.21	60	0.00	71	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.04	75	0.04
Magin 1975		52	0.28	79	0.00	55	0.07	47	0.07	45	0.16	39	0.11
Michalowski 1933		59	0.25	57	0.00	46	0.05	56	0.05	58	0.06	64	0.05
Milkina 1970		50	0.28	27	0.00	56	0.07	46	0.07	36	0.29	36	0.14
Mohovich 1999		14	0.42	4	0.06	7	0.17	16	0.52	18	0.49	15	0.50
Moravec 1969		68	0.21	48	0.00	73	0.03	83	0.03	70	0.04	79	0.03
Morozova 2008		7	0.43	58	0.00	21	0.07	31	0.32	45	0.09	32	0.17
Neighaus 1950		23	0.38	34	0.00	16	0.08	15	0.54	43	0.13	27	0.26
Niedzielski 1931		24	0.37	46	0.00	35	0.08	34	0.27	52	0.07	35	0.14
Ohlsson 1999		38	0.32	64	0.00	34	0.09	35	0.26	51	0.05	41	0.11
Osinska 1989		81	0.16	84	0.00	74	0.04	77	0.04	64	0.04	72	0.04
Pachmann 1927		57	0.26	42	0.00	52	0.05	67	0.05	63	0.06	63	0.05
Paderewski 1930		42	0.31	49	0.00	30	0.11	33	0.32	39	0.28	25	0.30
Perlemuter 1992		44	0.31	33	0.00	49	0.05	58	0.05	54	0.05	59	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		79	0.16	90	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	69	0.03	80	0.03
Poblocka 1999		29	0.34	31	0.00	28	0.09	23	0.43	21	0.42	19	0.42
Rabcewiczowa 1932		66	0.23	69	0.00	67	0.06	52	0.06	40	0.21	40	0.11
Rachmaninoff 1923		48	0.30	51	0.00	61	0.06	49	0.06	59	0.04	60	0.05
Rangell 2001		25	0.36	21	0.01	18	0.09	24	0.43	15	0.44	18	0.43
Richter 1976		31	0.34	39	0.00	44	0.05	45	0.10	48	0.09	49	0.09
Rosen 1989		61	0.25	87	0.00	58	0.07	48	0.07	73	0.03	68	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		69	0.21	38	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	64	0.04	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.16	65	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	59	0.04	81	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.15	80	0.00	84	0.03	79	0.03	63	0.04	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		86	0.12	70	0.00	88	0.03	82	0.03	84	0.02	91	0.02
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.13	71	0.00	82	0.04	74	0.04	64	0.03	86	0.03
Rossi 2007		90	-0.07	91	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	68	0.04	89	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		51	0.28	76	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	71	0.04	77	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		64	0.24	16	0.01	54	0.06	50	0.06	68	0.04	71	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		2	0.50	5	0.05	6	0.18	5	0.68	5	0.58	4	0.63
Schilhawsky 1960		13	0.42	26	0.00	23	0.10	14	0.56	4	0.67	9	0.61
Shebanova 2002		15	0.41	17	0.01	11	0.14	8	0.66	41	0.35	16	0.48
Smith 1975		70	0.21	77	0.00	77	0.04	76	0.04	66	0.05	76	0.04
Sokolov 2002		75	0.20	52	0.00	59	0.05	61	0.05	69	0.03	74	0.04
Sztompka 1959		55	0.27	11	0.02	36	0.08	39	0.17	55	0.06	46	0.10
Tomsic 1995		71	0.21	14	0.01	51	0.05	68	0.05	56	0.05	62	0.05
Uninsky 1932		27	0.35	44	0.00	40	0.07	37	0.21	52	0.06	43	0.11
Uninsky 1971		40	0.32	24	0.01	48	0.05	63	0.05	57	0.06	65	0.05
Wasowski 1980		37	0.32	13	0.01	33	0.13	26	0.39	39	0.26	24	0.32
Zak 1937		16	0.41	8	0.02	14	0.09	13	0.58	12	0.65	8	0.61
Zak 1951		19	0.40	22	0.01	17	0.09	17	0.52	9	0.65	10	0.58
Average		1	0.55	1	0.39	1	0.39	1	0.80	63	0.05	31	0.20
Random 1		88	0.06	62	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	10	0.44	51	0.09
Random 2		87	0.10	32	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	25	0.31	54	0.08
Random 3		91	-0.09	54	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	48	0.04	90	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).