Rosenthal 1931d

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		7	0.32	9	0.00	6	0.29	7	0.70	14	0.55	8	0.62
Anderszewski 2003		42	0.15	65	0.00	31	0.07	35	0.32	44	0.11	26	0.19
Ashkenazy 1981		38	0.16	35	0.00	35	0.07	32	0.37	52	0.07	29	0.16
Bacha 2000		20	0.24	25	0.00	26	0.09	29	0.40	37	0.21	19	0.29
Badura 1965		41	0.15	36	0.00	34	0.09	33	0.37	40	0.17	22	0.25
Barbosa 1983		46	0.13	55	0.00	58	0.03	64	0.03	74	0.04	72	0.03
Biret 1990		71	0.07	47	0.00	55	0.03	70	0.03	66	0.04	79	0.03
Blet 2003		76	0.05	48	0.00	65	0.03	69	0.03	80	0.03	73	0.03
Block 1995		67	0.08	49	0.00	66	0.03	72	0.03	85	0.02	89	0.02
Blumental 1952		30	0.18	66	0.00	23	0.09	24	0.42	41	0.15	23	0.25
Boshniakovich 1969		48	0.12	56	0.00	50	0.05	50	0.05	72	0.04	58	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		15	0.27	67	0.00	20	0.09	18	0.50	32	0.37	15	0.43
Bunin 1987		40	0.15	68	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.13	64	0.05	45	0.08
Bunin 1987b		37	0.16	69	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.17	70	0.04	44	0.08
Chiu 1999		66	0.08	21	0.00	59	0.04	57	0.04	79	0.04	56	0.04
Cohen 1997		14	0.27	8	0.00	10	0.15	10	0.62	21	0.52	9	0.57
Cortot 1951		12	0.29	18	0.00	15	0.13	11	0.56	24	0.51	11	0.53
Csalog 1996		89	-0.05	70	0.00	90	0.02	89	0.02	84	0.02	86	0.02
Czerny 1949		24	0.21	29	0.00	22	0.13	21	0.46	24	0.65	10	0.55
Czerny 1990		69	0.07	13	0.00	76	0.03	76	0.03	66	0.04	78	0.03
Duchoud 2007		82	0.02	37	0.00	82	0.03	74	0.03	90	0.02	88	0.02
Ezaki 2006		5	0.36	6	0.00	5	0.24	5	0.72	14	0.65	6	0.68
Falvay 1989		27	0.20	50	0.00	29	0.08	27	0.41	41	0.13	24	0.23
Farrell 1958		60	0.10	38	0.00	73	0.03	63	0.03	77	0.03	63	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		10	0.29	14	0.00	17	0.16	14	0.55	13	0.77	7	0.65
Fliere 1977		74	0.05	39	0.00	67	0.03	62	0.03	65	0.05	53	0.04
Fou 1978		43	0.14	57	0.00	37	0.07	36	0.31	80	0.03	40	0.10
Francois 1956		19	0.25	32	0.00	11	0.17	15	0.54	26	0.51	12	0.52
Friedman 1923		52	0.11	58	0.00	53	0.05	53	0.05	71	0.04	60	0.04
Friedman 1923b		56	0.10	71	0.00	61	0.03	73	0.03	70	0.04	77	0.03
Friedman 1930		78	0.05	72	0.00	52	0.04	61	0.04	84	0.03	74	0.03
Garcia 2007		45	0.13	10	0.00	70	0.04	56	0.04	85	0.03	76	0.03
Garcia 2007b		73	0.06	20	0.00	46	0.07	47	0.07	49	0.07	47	0.07
Gierzod 1998		11	0.29	73	0.00	16	0.11	13	0.55	25	0.43	13	0.49
Gornostaeva 1994		36	0.16	3	0.01	19	0.11	25	0.42	42	0.19	20	0.28
Groot 1988		44	0.13	74	0.00	33	0.07	30	0.38	72	0.04	37	0.12
Harasiewicz 1955		62	0.10	75	0.00	49	0.06	49	0.06	79	0.03	59	0.04
Hatto 1993		75	0.05	33	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	84	0.03	80	0.03
Hatto 1997		31	0.17	5	0.00	41	0.11	37	0.29	67	0.04	38	0.11
Horowitz 1949		72	0.06	59	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	80	0.03	67	0.03
Indjic 1988		77	0.05	60	0.00	81	0.03	77	0.03	82	0.03	71	0.03
Kapell 1951		84	0.02	40	0.00	85	0.03	80	0.03	81	0.03	64	0.03
Kissin 1993		85	0.01	41	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	85	0.03	85	0.02
Kushner 1989		33	0.17	76	0.00	36	0.06	39	0.25	76	0.04	41	0.10
Luisada 1991		50	0.12	34	0.00	56	0.04	59	0.04	80	0.04	52	0.04
Lushtak 2004		26	0.20	77	0.00	38	0.06	40	0.24	56	0.05	39	0.11
Malcuzynski 1961		34	0.17	61	0.00	40	0.07	41	0.21	73	0.04	42	0.09
Magaloff 1978		54	0.11	78	0.00	63	0.04	54	0.04	86	0.03	61	0.03
Magin 1975		90	-0.07	79	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	81	0.02	91	0.01
Michalowski 1933		79	0.05	62	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	74	0.04	70	0.03
Milkina 1970		32	0.17	15	0.00	28	0.08	28	0.41	44	0.16	21	0.26
Mohovich 1999		28	0.20	80	0.00	30	0.08	31	0.38	61	0.05	31	0.14
Moravec 1969		13	0.28	81	0.00	21	0.12	20	0.46	59	0.04	30	0.14
Morozova 2008		23	0.21	82	0.00	24	0.08	26	0.41	50	0.06	27	0.16
Neighaus 1950		25	0.21	51	0.00	39	0.08	38	0.26	78	0.03	43	0.09
Niedzielski 1931		63	0.09	42	0.00	51	0.05	52	0.05	66	0.05	51	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		64	0.09	26	0.00	62	0.04	55	0.04	77	0.04	57	0.04
Osinska 1989		49	0.12	27	0.00	64	0.05	51	0.05	75	0.03	54	0.04
Pachmann 1927		83	0.02	83	0.00	84	0.03	81	0.03	82	0.03	69	0.03
Paderewski 1930		61	0.10	84	0.00	60	0.03	75	0.03	72	0.04	68	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		55	0.11	43	0.00	47	0.07	48	0.07	81	0.03	50	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		65	0.09	44	0.00	78	0.03	83	0.03	81	0.03	62	0.03
Poblocka 1999		81	0.03	85	0.00	77	0.02	84	0.02	87	0.03	83	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		8	0.31	11	0.00	8	0.19	6	0.72	15	0.70	5	0.71
Rachmaninoff 1923		18	0.25	22	0.00	13	0.11	12	0.56	31	0.30	17	0.41
Rangell 2001		16	0.27	17	0.00	14	0.14	16	0.53	37	0.19	18	0.32
Richter 1976		87	0.00	52	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	84	0.03	84	0.02
Rosen 1989		17	0.26	53	0.00	18	0.12	17	0.52	71	0.03	35	0.12
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.49	4	0.00	4	0.62	4	0.85	6	0.78	4	0.81
Rosenthal 1931		2	0.77	2	0.02	2	0.90	2	0.97	2	0.97	2	0.97
Rosenthal 1931b		1	0.87	1	0.94	1	0.93	1	0.99	2	0.99	1	0.99
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.68	7	0.00	3	0.82	3	0.95	3	0.93	3	0.94
Rosenthal 1931d		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rossi 2007		88	0.00	30	0.00	75	0.03	71	0.03	52	0.05	55	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		22	0.22	16	0.00	25	0.10	23	0.44	49	0.08	25	0.19
Rubinstein 1952		57	0.10	54	0.00	57	0.03	68	0.03	78	0.03	81	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		21	0.24	45	0.00	27	0.10	22	0.45	67	0.04	33	0.13
Schilhawsky 1960		59	0.10	28	0.00	48	0.07	46	0.07	55	0.05	49	0.06
Shebanova 2002		80	0.03	46	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	83	0.03	87	0.02
Smith 1975		35	0.17	12	0.00	12	0.14	19	0.49	30	0.38	16	0.43
Sokolov 2002		58	0.10	31	0.00	43	0.06	44	0.14	75	0.03	48	0.06
Sztompka 1959		39	0.15	86	0.00	44	0.09	43	0.17	75	0.03	46	0.07
Tomsic 1995		29	0.19	23	0.00	32	0.07	34	0.36	58	0.05	32	0.13
Uninsky 1932		51	0.11	87	0.00	69	0.04	60	0.04	87	0.02	75	0.03
Uninsky 1971		9	0.30	19	0.00	9	0.23	9	0.64	26	0.33	14	0.46
Wasowski 1980		86	0.00	88	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	83	0.03	82	0.02
Zak 1937		53	0.11	89	0.00	72	0.03	65	0.03	75	0.03	65	0.03
Zak 1951		47	0.12	90	0.00	54	0.03	66	0.03	71	0.04	66	0.03
Average		6	0.32	91	0.00	7	0.26	8	0.68	78	0.04	28	0.16
Random 1		70	0.07	63	0.00	68	0.03	67	0.03	6	0.52	36	0.12
Random 2		68	0.08	24	0.00	71	0.04	58	0.04	19	0.40	34	0.13
Random 3		91	-0.13	64	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	74	0.03	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).