Rosenthal 1930

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		26	0.49	8	0.01	15	0.10	19	0.50	33	0.16	19	0.28
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.43	25	0.00	48	0.04	56	0.04	65	0.03	77	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		30	0.46	39	0.00	35	0.07	33	0.31	59	0.04	34	0.11
Bacha 2000		84	0.21	78	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	85	0.02	91	0.01
Badura 1965		35	0.45	6	0.02	9	0.15	22	0.46	16	0.40	9	0.43
Barbosa 1983		78	0.27	53	0.00	77	0.03	71	0.03	81	0.03	76	0.03
Biret 1990		50	0.40	29	0.00	57	0.04	65	0.04	77	0.04	65	0.04
Blet 2003		61	0.36	72	0.00	70	0.04	55	0.04	65	0.05	60	0.04
Block 1995		55	0.38	82	0.00	64	0.05	47	0.05	82	0.03	62	0.04
Blumental 1952		72	0.30	24	0.00	55	0.05	49	0.05	63	0.04	63	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		64	0.34	73	0.00	73	0.03	73	0.03	79	0.03	82	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		43	0.42	61	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.18	63	0.04	43	0.08
Bunin 1987		19	0.52	26	0.00	20	0.11	13	0.55	35	0.21	15	0.34
Bunin 1987b		18	0.52	55	0.00	19	0.06	12	0.56	35	0.21	13	0.34
Chiu 1999		82	0.23	47	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	86	0.03	69	0.03
Cohen 1997		76	0.29	41	0.00	65	0.03	70	0.03	67	0.04	83	0.03
Cortot 1951		20	0.51	36	0.00	21	0.10	23	0.45	18	0.36	10	0.40
Csalog 1996		83	0.22	58	0.00	89	0.01	90	0.01	77	0.03	89	0.02
Czerny 1949		11	0.55	22	0.00	12	0.15	8	0.64	22	0.46	6	0.54
Czerny 1990		17	0.52	30	0.00	27	0.08	24	0.44	49	0.06	25	0.16
Duchoud 2007		38	0.44	51	0.00	52	0.04	52	0.04	60	0.04	61	0.04
Ezaki 2006		9	0.57	9	0.01	8	0.19	7	0.64	29	0.29	8	0.43
Falvay 1989		45	0.42	28	0.00	34	0.07	38	0.25	64	0.04	36	0.10
Farrell 1958		39	0.43	18	0.00	50	0.04	62	0.04	53	0.04	54	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		40	0.43	17	0.01	43	0.04	45	0.09	34	0.20	30	0.13
Fliere 1977		21	0.51	37	0.00	37	0.09	35	0.28	71	0.04	33	0.11
Fou 1978		60	0.36	48	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.12	61	0.04	45	0.07
Francois 1956		13	0.53	68	0.00	18	0.13	25	0.43	50	0.05	26	0.15
Friedman 1923		81	0.26	79	0.00	53	0.05	51	0.05	29	0.25	35	0.11
Friedman 1923b		80	0.26	89	0.00	54	0.07	46	0.07	31	0.22	31	0.12
Friedman 1930		46	0.42	31	0.00	16	0.11	16	0.52	12	0.52	7	0.52
Garcia 2007		85	0.20	56	0.00	74	0.03	77	0.03	77	0.03	81	0.03
Garcia 2007b		88	0.10	80	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	75	0.03	90	0.02
Gierzod 1998		22	0.51	20	0.00	29	0.08	26	0.41	48	0.07	24	0.17
Gornostaeva 1994		7	0.58	5	0.03	10	0.12	9	0.57	28	0.27	11	0.39
Groot 1988		16	0.52	2	0.06	7	0.17	17	0.52	37	0.20	16	0.32
Harasiewicz 1955		59	0.37	21	0.00	22	0.09	29	0.36	67	0.03	41	0.10
Hatto 1993		68	0.31	43	0.00	62	0.04	54	0.04	54	0.05	66	0.04
Hatto 1997		57	0.37	52	0.00	47	0.04	60	0.04	46	0.07	49	0.05
Horowitz 1949		27	0.48	16	0.01	25	0.07	20	0.49	34	0.19	17	0.31
Indjic 1988		73	0.30	62	0.00	69	0.04	61	0.04	63	0.05	59	0.04
Kapell 1951		33	0.45	81	0.00	61	0.05	48	0.05	62	0.04	55	0.04
Kissin 1993		58	0.37	69	0.00	46	0.04	58	0.04	71	0.04	58	0.04
Kushner 1989		14	0.53	33	0.00	36	0.08	37	0.27	72	0.04	37	0.10
Luisada 1991		67	0.32	54	0.00	81	0.03	72	0.03	88	0.02	86	0.02
Lushtak 2004		66	0.33	90	0.00	44	0.04	43	0.11	76	0.03	47	0.06
Malcuzynski 1961		12	0.54	65	0.00	24	0.09	21	0.46	64	0.04	28	0.14
Magaloff 1978		8	0.57	35	0.00	11	0.13	10	0.56	52	0.06	22	0.18
Magin 1975		65	0.33	49	0.00	75	0.03	81	0.03	82	0.03	71	0.03
Michalowski 1933		77	0.28	91	0.00	56	0.04	57	0.04	69	0.04	57	0.04
Milkina 1970		52	0.39	40	0.00	66	0.04	66	0.04	78	0.03	73	0.03
Mohovich 1999		36	0.44	42	0.00	33	0.08	32	0.32	77	0.03	39	0.10
Moravec 1969		25	0.49	15	0.01	38	0.12	36	0.28	62	0.04	32	0.11
Morozova 2008		28	0.48	19	0.00	14	0.09	14	0.54	30	0.17	18	0.30
Neighaus 1950		31	0.45	70	0.00	31	0.07	31	0.35	78	0.03	40	0.10
Niedzielski 1931		63	0.35	45	0.00	68	0.04	67	0.04	84	0.02	70	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.44	44	0.00	51	0.05	50	0.05	73	0.03	56	0.04
Osinska 1989		42	0.42	83	0.00	59	0.04	69	0.04	79	0.04	51	0.04
Pachmann 1927		86	0.15	84	0.00	85	0.02	82	0.02	85	0.02	88	0.02
Paderewski 1930		47	0.41	71	0.00	63	0.04	59	0.04	63	0.03	75	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		44	0.42	27	0.00	28	0.09	27	0.40	58	0.04	29	0.13
Pierdomenico 2008		56	0.38	66	0.00	58	0.04	68	0.04	65	0.04	52	0.04
Poblocka 1999		34	0.45	57	0.00	60	0.04	63	0.04	84	0.03	68	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		32	0.45	14	0.01	30	0.07	34	0.30	43	0.15	20	0.21
Rachmaninoff 1923		10	0.55	3	0.04	5	0.18	6	0.67	10	0.51	5	0.58
Rangell 2001		54	0.38	32	0.00	67	0.04	64	0.04	83	0.03	84	0.03
Richter 1976		53	0.39	85	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.14	57	0.04	46	0.07
Rosen 1989		29	0.47	50	0.00	32	0.09	30	0.35	79	0.03	38	0.10
Rosenthal 1930		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931		3	0.61	13	0.01	2	0.13	3	0.75	4	0.80	2	0.77
Rosenthal 1931b		4	0.61	7	0.02	4	0.18	2	0.76	4	0.79	3	0.77
Rosenthal 1931c		1	0.74	1	0.63	1	0.62	1	0.85	4	0.83	1	0.84
Rosenthal 1931d		5	0.60	4	0.04	6	0.17	4	0.72	4	0.75	4	0.73
Rossi 2007		87	0.14	86	0.00	84	0.02	84	0.02	83	0.02	87	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		79	0.27	34	0.00	82	0.02	83	0.02	45	0.09	53	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		75	0.30	46	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	74	0.04	85	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		51	0.39	12	0.01	71	0.03	75	0.03	81	0.03	78	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		48	0.40	63	0.00	49	0.04	53	0.04	75	0.03	79	0.03
Shebanova 2002		74	0.30	74	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03	80	0.03
Smith 1975		15	0.52	38	0.00	17	0.12	18	0.51	72	0.04	27	0.14
Sokolov 2002		6	0.58	59	0.00	13	0.12	11	0.56	36	0.26	12	0.38
Sztompka 1959		23	0.50	11	0.01	23	0.08	15	0.52	37	0.22	14	0.34
Tomsic 1995		62	0.35	75	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.09	84	0.03	48	0.05
Uninsky 1932		49	0.40	64	0.00	40	0.05	41	0.13	46	0.06	42	0.09
Uninsky 1971		24	0.50	10	0.01	26	0.08	28	0.39	47	0.07	23	0.17
Wasowski 1980		70	0.31	76	0.00	79	0.03	78	0.03	72	0.04	67	0.03
Zak 1937		71	0.31	87	0.00	78	0.03	76	0.03	78	0.03	72	0.03
Zak 1951		69	0.31	88	0.00	72	0.03	74	0.03	76	0.04	74	0.03
Average		2	0.64	23	0.00	3	0.14	5	0.69	57	0.05	21	0.19
Random 1		91	-0.02	77	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	35	0.14	64	0.04
Random 2		89	0.05	67	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	21	0.32	44	0.08
Random 3		90	0.04	60	0.00	90	0.01	88	0.01	30	0.28	50	0.05

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).