Bunin 1987b

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		38	0.30	2	0.00	44	0.05	42	0.14	67	0.04	51	0.07
Anderszewski 2003		89	0.00	12	0.00	89	0.02	90	0.02	88	0.02	88	0.02
Ashkenazy 1981		4	0.47	13	0.00	6	0.11	6	0.65	33	0.45	9	0.54
Bacha 2000		77	0.13	14	0.00	76	0.04	74	0.04	87	0.02	77	0.03
Badura 1965		67	0.20	15	0.00	71	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.03	80	0.03
Barbosa 1983		32	0.33	16	0.00	28	0.08	25	0.41	29	0.36	25	0.38
Biret 1990		45	0.28	17	0.00	43	0.05	40	0.16	29	0.46	35	0.27
Blet 2003		21	0.38	18	0.00	11	0.12	12	0.56	26	0.50	10	0.53
Block 1995		53	0.26	19	0.00	54	0.08	47	0.08	76	0.04	55	0.06
Blumental 1952		58	0.24	3	0.00	46	0.05	60	0.05	40	0.16	45	0.09
Boshniakovich 1969		52	0.26	20	0.00	53	0.07	48	0.07	68	0.04	63	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		66	0.21	21	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	53	0.07	57	0.05
Bunin 1987		1	1.00	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Bunin 1987b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Chiu 1999		13	0.40	22	0.00	21	0.08	15	0.55	34	0.32	20	0.42
Cohen 1997		74	0.15	23	0.00	77	0.04	75	0.04	85	0.02	82	0.03
Cortot 1951		78	0.12	24	0.00	78	0.03	78	0.03	72	0.03	83	0.03
Csalog 1996		47	0.28	25	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.15	30	0.32	38	0.22
Czerny 1949		79	0.11	26	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	47	0.07	61	0.05
Czerny 1990		20	0.39	27	0.00	26	0.09	21	0.48	27	0.58	11	0.53
Duchoud 2007		22	0.37	28	0.00	16	0.09	11	0.57	16	0.52	8	0.54
Ezaki 2006		68	0.20	29	0.00	45	0.05	45	0.10	60	0.05	48	0.07
Falvay 1989		37	0.30	30	0.00	38	0.08	38	0.20	46	0.10	42	0.14
Farrell 1958		25	0.35	31	0.00	31	0.10	26	0.41	11	0.52	17	0.46
Ferenczy 1958		84	0.07	32	0.00	87	0.03	81	0.03	54	0.06	71	0.04
Fliere 1977		8	0.43	33	0.00	5	0.11	16	0.53	40	0.41	16	0.47
Fou 1978		43	0.28	34	0.00	60	0.06	56	0.06	62	0.04	60	0.05
Francois 1956		64	0.21	35	0.00	68	0.05	61	0.05	56	0.06	65	0.05
Friedman 1923		19	0.39	36	0.00	17	0.07	13	0.56	30	0.49	12	0.52
Friedman 1923b		14	0.40	37	0.00	12	0.07	10	0.60	28	0.52	7	0.56
Friedman 1930		12	0.41	38	0.00	8	0.11	7	0.65	19	0.60	5	0.62
Garcia 2007		48	0.28	4	0.00	48	0.07	50	0.07	66	0.05	54	0.06
Garcia 2007b		7	0.44	39	0.00	4	0.21	9	0.62	9	0.69	4	0.65
Gierzod 1998		83	0.07	5	0.00	83	0.03	79	0.03	83	0.02	89	0.02
Gornostaeva 1994		71	0.16	40	0.00	65	0.04	66	0.04	68	0.04	73	0.04
Groot 1988		17	0.40	41	0.00	22	0.10	27	0.40	36	0.24	30	0.31
Harasiewicz 1955		61	0.22	42	0.00	66	0.06	57	0.06	77	0.04	64	0.05
Hatto 1993		36	0.31	43	0.00	19	0.08	30	0.39	41	0.22	33	0.29
Hatto 1997		39	0.30	44	0.00	15	0.10	31	0.38	28	0.29	27	0.33
Horowitz 1949		5	0.47	45	0.00	7	0.11	5	0.66	13	0.69	3	0.67
Indjic 1988		31	0.33	46	0.00	14	0.08	18	0.51	32	0.34	21	0.42
Kapell 1951		15	0.40	47	0.00	13	0.08	14	0.56	20	0.44	14	0.50
Kissin 1993		62	0.22	48	0.00	58	0.04	73	0.04	48	0.08	52	0.06
Kushner 1989		34	0.32	49	0.00	49	0.09	46	0.09	48	0.08	46	0.08
Luisada 1991		6	0.46	50	0.00	10	0.14	8	0.63	18	0.59	6	0.61
Lushtak 2004		46	0.28	51	0.00	47	0.06	58	0.06	32	0.19	44	0.11
Malcuzynski 1961		16	0.40	52	0.00	33	0.11	29	0.40	30	0.26	29	0.32
Magaloff 1978		40	0.29	53	0.00	42	0.06	44	0.11	63	0.05	49	0.07
Magin 1975		50	0.27	54	0.00	40	0.06	43	0.13	41	0.24	40	0.18
Michalowski 1933		30	0.34	55	0.00	37	0.09	36	0.27	43	0.20	37	0.23
Milkina 1970		82	0.08	56	0.00	82	0.03	84	0.03	75	0.03	78	0.03
Mohovich 1999		80	0.11	57	0.00	81	0.03	86	0.03	70	0.04	81	0.03
Moravec 1969		29	0.34	58	0.00	39	0.07	39	0.18	41	0.13	41	0.15
Morozova 2008		23	0.36	59	0.00	24	0.11	22	0.46	23	0.35	24	0.40
Neighaus 1950		55	0.25	60	0.00	61	0.05	64	0.05	69	0.04	75	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		24	0.36	6	0.00	34	0.11	33	0.32	34	0.25	34	0.28
Ohlsson 1999		41	0.29	61	0.00	57	0.04	72	0.04	84	0.03	79	0.03
Osinska 1989		73	0.16	62	0.00	64	0.04	67	0.04	60	0.05	66	0.04
Pachmann 1927		26	0.35	63	0.00	27	0.08	23	0.42	31	0.46	19	0.44
Paderewski 1930		60	0.23	7	0.00	50	0.07	49	0.07	52	0.07	50	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		54	0.26	64	0.00	56	0.06	54	0.06	53	0.05	56	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		42	0.28	65	0.00	52	0.07	51	0.07	37	0.19	43	0.12
Poblocka 1999		28	0.34	66	0.00	30	0.08	28	0.40	22	0.42	22	0.41
Rabcewiczowa 1932		69	0.18	67	0.00	75	0.04	77	0.04	59	0.06	59	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923		2	0.58	8	0.00	2	0.33	2	0.79	2	0.83	2	0.81
Rangell 2001		63	0.22	68	0.00	72	0.05	62	0.05	78	0.03	74	0.04
Richter 1976		33	0.33	69	0.00	23	0.08	24	0.41	40	0.39	23	0.40
Rosen 1989		57	0.25	70	0.00	51	0.06	55	0.06	70	0.03	72	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		51	0.27	9	0.00	67	0.06	53	0.06	57	0.05	62	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		88	0.04	71	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	84	0.02	87	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		81	0.09	72	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	76	0.03	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		75	0.15	10	0.00	74	0.04	76	0.04	75	0.03	85	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		72	0.16	73	0.00	70	0.04	70	0.04	42	0.17	47	0.08
Rossi 2007		87	0.05	74	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	50	0.05	67	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		59	0.23	11	0.00	59	0.05	63	0.05	72	0.04	68	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		70	0.16	75	0.00	62	0.04	68	0.04	57	0.05	76	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		76	0.13	76	0.00	73	0.05	65	0.05	83	0.03	70	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		44	0.28	77	0.00	36	0.09	37	0.22	27	0.39	32	0.29
Shebanova 2002		10	0.43	78	0.00	9	0.12	4	0.67	40	0.39	13	0.51
Smith 1975		85	0.06	79	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	85	0.02	86	0.02
Sokolov 2002		56	0.25	80	0.00	55	0.07	52	0.07	60	0.03	58	0.05
Sztompka 1959		11	0.41	81	0.00	20	0.09	17	0.52	31	0.39	18	0.45
Tomsic 1995		49	0.27	82	0.00	29	0.08	34	0.28	31	0.21	36	0.24
Uninsky 1932		18	0.39	83	0.00	25	0.12	19	0.51	40	0.21	28	0.33
Uninsky 1971		65	0.21	84	0.00	63	0.06	59	0.06	81	0.03	69	0.04
Wasowski 1980		9	0.43	85	0.00	18	0.09	20	0.50	31	0.46	15	0.48
Zak 1937		27	0.34	86	0.00	32	0.11	32	0.35	29	0.37	26	0.36
Zak 1951		35	0.32	87	0.00	35	0.10	35	0.27	33	0.32	31	0.29
Average		3	0.53	88	0.00	3	0.32	3	0.78	53	0.06	39	0.22
Random 1		90	-0.02	89	0.00	90	0.02	89	0.02	71	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		86	0.05	90	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	44	0.13	53	0.06
Random 3		91	-0.10	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	49	0.04	91	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).