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		2	0.76	2	0.11	2	0.28	2	0.65	9	0.47	5	0.55
Anderszewski 2003		58	0.52	17	0.01	57	0.05	47	0.05	62	0.03	66	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		66	0.49	53	0.00	46	0.05	46	0.05	56	0.04	71	0.04
Bacha 2000		52	0.53	59	0.00	58	0.05	58	0.05	63	0.05	55	0.05
Badura 1965		60	0.51	49	0.00	66	0.03	67	0.03	53	0.05	70	0.04
Barbosa 1983		46	0.56	56	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.11	16	0.33	32	0.19
Biret 1990		23	0.65	12	0.01	14	0.09	15	0.44	28	0.25	21	0.33
Blet 2003		25	0.64	65	0.00	37	0.07	31	0.27	33	0.20	30	0.23
Block 1995		68	0.48	41	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	80	0.03	89	0.02
Blumental 1952		77	0.43	36	0.00	40	0.06	43	0.11	42	0.09	44	0.10
Boshniakovich 1969		53	0.53	87	0.00	69	0.03	76	0.03	71	0.04	85	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		44	0.56	76	0.00	71	0.03	70	0.03	61	0.05	64	0.04
Bunin 1987		62	0.50	60	0.00	72	0.03	82	0.03	51	0.05	72	0.04
Bunin 1987b		64	0.49	68	0.00	73	0.05	55	0.05	58	0.05	57	0.05
Chiu 1999		71	0.47	70	0.00	64	0.03	69	0.03	54	0.04	78	0.03
Cohen 1997		84	0.31	33	0.00	85	0.03	77	0.03	45	0.07	61	0.05
Cortot 1951		54	0.53	57	0.00	67	0.03	74	0.03	48	0.06	75	0.04
Csalog 1996		63	0.50	34	0.00	48	0.05	59	0.05	27	0.26	42	0.11
Czerny 1949		3	0.73	26	0.00	11	0.12	4	0.58	17	0.44	6	0.51
Czerny 1990		1	0.78	1	0.44	1	0.44	1	0.68	4	0.58	1	0.63
Duchoud 2007		59	0.51	43	0.00	60	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04	67	0.04
Ezaki 2006		16	0.66	21	0.00	17	0.09	18	0.40	32	0.23	24	0.30
Falvay 1989		11	0.70	5	0.04	9	0.11	5	0.57	2	0.67	2	0.62
Farrell 1958		34	0.61	42	0.00	38	0.07	36	0.21	18	0.28	27	0.24
Ferenczy 1958		38	0.59	9	0.01	26	0.06	38	0.15	37	0.12	38	0.13
Fliere 1977		13	0.68	83	0.00	21	0.07	25	0.32	53	0.04	41	0.11
Fou 1978		36	0.60	4	0.07	10	0.13	16	0.43	24	0.33	15	0.38
Francois 1956		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Friedman 1923		86	0.30	73	0.00	75	0.02	85	0.02	52	0.06	88	0.03
Friedman 1923b		85	0.30	69	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	71	0.05	73	0.04
Friedman 1930		70	0.47	71	0.00	63	0.03	71	0.03	39	0.15	52	0.07
Garcia 2007		78	0.39	89	0.00	76	0.03	79	0.03	52	0.05	68	0.04
Garcia 2007b		87	0.30	90	0.00	78	0.03	81	0.03	48	0.05	77	0.04
Gierzod 1998		12	0.68	74	0.00	15	0.08	14	0.44	32	0.25	20	0.33
Gornostaeva 1994		7	0.71	18	0.01	13	0.18	11	0.49	12	0.48	9	0.48
Groot 1988		4	0.73	3	0.09	7	0.15	3	0.59	2	0.57	3	0.58
Harasiewicz 1955		51	0.54	61	0.00	45	0.05	48	0.05	47	0.05	62	0.05
Hatto 1993		83	0.32	78	0.00	80	0.02	84	0.02	74	0.04	87	0.03
Hatto 1997		79	0.39	82	0.00	77	0.03	72	0.03	68	0.04	83	0.03
Horowitz 1949		67	0.49	84	0.00	68	0.04	64	0.04	66	0.03	80	0.03
Indjic 1988		82	0.35	86	0.00	79	0.03	83	0.03	79	0.03	82	0.03
Kapell 1951		20	0.66	28	0.00	24	0.06	27	0.31	44	0.08	34	0.16
Kissin 1993		31	0.63	45	0.00	31	0.05	28	0.31	33	0.17	29	0.23
Kushner 1989		6	0.72	7	0.02	5	0.19	9	0.52	13	0.46	7	0.49
Luisada 1991		57	0.52	63	0.00	30	0.06	37	0.18	52	0.05	45	0.09
Lushtak 2004		37	0.59	52	0.00	19	0.09	21	0.37	34	0.19	25	0.27
Malcuzynski 1961		35	0.61	32	0.00	54	0.05	50	0.05	73	0.04	65	0.04
Magaloff 1978		17	0.66	30	0.00	22	0.06	22	0.37	22	0.32	18	0.34
Magin 1975		76	0.46	14	0.01	39	0.06	39	0.14	54	0.05	48	0.08
Michalowski 1933		73	0.46	75	0.00	59	0.04	63	0.04	53	0.07	58	0.05
Milkina 1970		24	0.65	38	0.00	43	0.06	40	0.13	66	0.05	49	0.08
Mohovich 1999		10	0.71	8	0.02	3	0.14	8	0.54	21	0.42	8	0.48
Moravec 1969		22	0.65	27	0.00	28	0.08	32	0.23	14	0.41	23	0.31
Morozova 2008		61	0.51	77	0.00	32	0.06	34	0.22	39	0.12	36	0.16
Neighaus 1950		8	0.71	13	0.01	6	0.15	7	0.55	20	0.33	12	0.43
Niedzielski 1931		30	0.63	20	0.01	27	0.07	33	0.22	24	0.29	26	0.25
Ohlsson 1999		33	0.61	55	0.00	41	0.05	41	0.13	45	0.05	50	0.08
Osinska 1989		5	0.72	29	0.00	12	0.17	10	0.51	20	0.39	10	0.45
Pachmann 1927		48	0.55	40	0.00	65	0.03	66	0.03	23	0.27	46	0.09
Paderewski 1930		19	0.66	88	0.00	35	0.07	29	0.30	12	0.37	19	0.33
Perlemuter 1992		15	0.67	24	0.00	16	0.08	17	0.42	22	0.30	17	0.35
Pierdomenico 2008		39	0.59	39	0.00	29	0.06	23	0.35	3	0.51	13	0.42
Poblocka 1999		41	0.58	64	0.00	49	0.05	54	0.05	59	0.05	56	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		9	0.71	6	0.02	4	0.14	6	0.55	4	0.57	4	0.56
Rachmaninoff 1923		27	0.63	19	0.01	34	0.07	26	0.31	34	0.16	31	0.22
Rangell 2001		72	0.47	62	0.00	70	0.03	68	0.03	63	0.03	86	0.03
Richter 1976		80	0.39	85	0.00	87	0.04	65	0.04	70	0.03	81	0.03
Rosen 1989		21	0.66	37	0.00	8	0.12	12	0.47	17	0.43	11	0.45
Rosenthal 1930		45	0.56	72	0.00	62	0.03	73	0.03	45	0.06	69	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		69	0.48	31	0.00	83	0.03	75	0.03	37	0.14	54	0.06
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.46	79	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	40	0.09	76	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		49	0.55	58	0.00	61	0.04	60	0.04	23	0.33	43	0.11
Rosenthal 1931d		65	0.49	66	0.00	84	0.04	61	0.04	65	0.04	74	0.04
Rossi 2007		74	0.46	10	0.01	56	0.05	52	0.05	13	0.39	37	0.14
Rubinstein 1939		81	0.36	51	0.00	86	0.03	78	0.03	64	0.04	79	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		50	0.54	35	0.00	52	0.05	57	0.05	31	0.29	40	0.12
Rubinstein 1966		43	0.57	23	0.00	47	0.05	51	0.05	41	0.16	47	0.09
Schilhawsky 1960		40	0.59	54	0.00	55	0.05	45	0.05	57	0.05	59	0.05
Shebanova 2002		26	0.63	50	0.00	36	0.06	35	0.22	39	0.16	33	0.19
Smith 1975		18	0.66	47	0.00	18	0.12	19	0.40	27	0.26	22	0.32
Sokolov 2002		42	0.58	25	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.11	41	0.14	39	0.12
Sztompka 1959		14	0.67	46	0.00	20	0.10	13	0.45	26	0.31	16	0.37
Tomsic 1995		32	0.62	16	0.01	33	0.07	30	0.30	13	0.50	14	0.39
Uninsky 1932		56	0.53	48	0.00	50	0.05	49	0.05	50	0.06	60	0.05
Uninsky 1971		55	0.53	67	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	45	0.09	51	0.07
Wasowski 1980		47	0.55	15	0.01	51	0.05	53	0.05	66	0.04	63	0.04
Zak 1937		29	0.63	11	0.01	25	0.07	24	0.35	47	0.07	35	0.16
Zak 1951		28	0.63	22	0.00	23	0.07	20	0.39	38	0.14	28	0.23
Random 1		90	-0.21	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	80	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		89	-0.11	81	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	53	0.04	84	0.03
Random 3		88	-0.06	44	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	23	0.25	53	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).