Tomsic 1995

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		17	0.64	18	0.01	26	0.08	27	0.31	78	0.03	37	0.10
Anderszewski 2003		55	0.49	37	0.00	35	0.06	37	0.19	53	0.04	40	0.09
Ashkenazy 1981		49	0.52	42	0.00	52	0.04	69	0.04	47	0.05	67	0.04
Bacha 2000		50	0.51	61	0.00	55	0.04	56	0.04	56	0.05	51	0.04
Badura 1965		65	0.46	59	0.00	57	0.05	45	0.05	54	0.05	50	0.05
Barbosa 1983		53	0.50	76	0.00	18	0.09	20	0.39	28	0.23	15	0.30
Biret 1990		39	0.56	26	0.00	34	0.06	25	0.34	52	0.06	27	0.14
Blet 2003		23	0.62	47	0.00	33	0.06	26	0.31	46	0.06	26	0.14
Block 1995		28	0.60	53	0.00	32	0.06	31	0.27	24	0.27	18	0.27
Blumental 1952		80	0.35	30	0.00	59	0.05	46	0.05	66	0.03	65	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		32	0.58	31	0.00	51	0.04	67	0.04	57	0.05	66	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		38	0.57	64	0.00	54	0.05	47	0.05	59	0.05	48	0.05
Bunin 1987		52	0.50	16	0.01	62	0.04	61	0.04	65	0.04	69	0.04
Bunin 1987b		57	0.49	10	0.01	63	0.05	52	0.05	68	0.04	56	0.04
Chiu 1999		62	0.48	73	0.00	49	0.03	73	0.03	61	0.04	74	0.03
Cohen 1997		82	0.32	71	0.00	81	0.05	53	0.05	60	0.04	68	0.04
Cortot 1951		63	0.47	44	0.00	74	0.03	72	0.03	78	0.04	86	0.03
Csalog 1996		45	0.54	21	0.00	37	0.06	39	0.18	17	0.39	19	0.26
Czerny 1949		66	0.46	84	0.00	79	0.04	71	0.04	84	0.03	81	0.03
Czerny 1990		14	0.64	41	0.00	22	0.10	17	0.44	74	0.03	34	0.11
Duchoud 2007		59	0.49	49	0.00	58	0.05	49	0.05	78	0.03	64	0.04
Ezaki 2006		7	0.67	32	0.00	12	0.12	9	0.56	42	0.11	20	0.25
Falvay 1989		1	0.78	2	0.24	2	0.39	2	0.73	3	0.67	2	0.70
Farrell 1958		29	0.60	56	0.00	36	0.07	32	0.27	50	0.06	29	0.13
Ferenczy 1958		47	0.54	25	0.00	61	0.04	60	0.04	62	0.04	63	0.04
Fliere 1977		19	0.63	67	0.00	28	0.07	28	0.31	80	0.03	35	0.10
Fou 1978		8	0.67	45	0.00	7	0.14	8	0.60	26	0.30	8	0.42
Francois 1956		22	0.62	9	0.01	13	0.09	13	0.50	30	0.30	9	0.39
Friedman 1923		86	0.15	57	0.00	87	0.03	77	0.03	79	0.03	89	0.03
Friedman 1923b		87	0.15	85	0.00	86	0.03	79	0.03	78	0.04	84	0.03
Friedman 1930		85	0.26	50	0.00	84	0.03	78	0.03	71	0.04	78	0.03
Garcia 2007		74	0.42	83	0.00	76	0.03	74	0.03	86	0.03	82	0.03
Garcia 2007b		83	0.29	63	0.00	83	0.04	70	0.04	86	0.02	88	0.03
Gierzod 1998		35	0.57	55	0.00	43	0.06	41	0.14	74	0.03	47	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		26	0.61	35	0.00	31	0.06	29	0.30	51	0.05	32	0.12
Groot 1988		3	0.76	4	0.05	3	0.38	4	0.68	8	0.54	3	0.61
Harasiewicz 1955		42	0.55	52	0.00	21	0.14	19	0.40	53	0.04	30	0.13
Hatto 1993		81	0.33	72	0.00	71	0.02	86	0.02	57	0.04	85	0.03
Hatto 1997		77	0.38	22	0.00	67	0.03	76	0.03	69	0.04	79	0.03
Horowitz 1949		61	0.48	23	0.00	60	0.05	54	0.05	67	0.03	57	0.04
Indjic 1988		79	0.36	78	0.00	68	0.03	81	0.03	60	0.05	61	0.04
Kapell 1951		37	0.57	48	0.00	48	0.04	58	0.04	47	0.05	55	0.04
Kissin 1993		5	0.70	11	0.01	6	0.13	11	0.54	31	0.18	14	0.31
Kushner 1989		13	0.65	19	0.00	15	0.08	14	0.50	43	0.11	22	0.23
Luisada 1991		34	0.57	54	0.00	19	0.08	30	0.28	67	0.04	33	0.11
Lushtak 2004		9	0.67	3	0.14	4	0.27	3	0.70	13	0.39	6	0.52
Malcuzynski 1961		25	0.61	29	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.14	64	0.04	44	0.07
Magaloff 1978		20	0.63	39	0.00	16	0.09	18	0.44	31	0.25	13	0.33
Magin 1975		51	0.51	65	0.00	56	0.05	51	0.05	81	0.03	54	0.04
Michalowski 1933		84	0.29	82	0.00	85	0.05	55	0.05	84	0.03	60	0.04
Milkina 1970		4	0.70	12	0.01	5	0.18	6	0.61	27	0.32	7	0.44
Mohovich 1999		2	0.78	1	0.34	1	0.33	1	0.76	3	0.69	1	0.72
Moravec 1969		58	0.49	69	0.00	75	0.04	68	0.04	71	0.03	72	0.03
Morozova 2008		48	0.54	20	0.00	39	0.07	35	0.20	50	0.04	41	0.09
Neighaus 1950		24	0.62	14	0.01	29	0.08	33	0.25	63	0.04	38	0.10
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.40	43	0.00	82	0.03	82	0.03	78	0.03	75	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		41	0.55	51	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.09	56	0.05	45	0.07
Osinska 1989		21	0.62	77	0.00	24	0.08	23	0.35	48	0.05	28	0.13
Pachmann 1927		30	0.60	17	0.01	41	0.06	40	0.18	17	0.35	21	0.25
Paderewski 1930		43	0.55	46	0.00	50	0.04	63	0.04	52	0.04	58	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		16	0.64	24	0.00	14	0.09	15	0.48	34	0.15	17	0.27
Pierdomenico 2008		31	0.58	68	0.00	23	0.11	24	0.35	21	0.40	11	0.37
Poblocka 1999		33	0.58	38	0.00	53	0.04	59	0.04	79	0.03	73	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		46	0.54	15	0.01	30	0.06	34	0.22	42	0.11	24	0.16
Rachmaninoff 1923		69	0.44	33	0.00	46	0.04	62	0.04	60	0.04	53	0.04
Rangell 2001		36	0.57	75	0.00	17	0.10	22	0.36	19	0.35	12	0.35
Richter 1976		60	0.49	58	0.00	69	0.03	83	0.03	63	0.04	76	0.03
Rosen 1989		27	0.61	28	0.00	25	0.09	21	0.39	66	0.04	31	0.12
Rosenthal 1930		71	0.43	80	0.00	70	0.03	84	0.03	75	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		73	0.42	79	0.00	66	0.05	50	0.05	44	0.06	49	0.05
Rosenthal 1931b		76	0.40	81	0.00	77	0.03	80	0.03	67	0.04	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		64	0.47	89	0.00	65	0.04	66	0.04	49	0.05	71	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		72	0.43	88	0.00	78	0.03	75	0.03	61	0.05	70	0.04
Rossi 2007		78	0.37	66	0.00	38	0.06	43	0.12	17	0.36	23	0.21
Rubinstein 1939		70	0.43	60	0.00	64	0.05	48	0.05	38	0.18	39	0.09
Rubinstein 1952		10	0.66	13	0.01	10	0.12	7	0.60	12	0.55	5	0.57
Rubinstein 1966		11	0.65	5	0.04	8	0.13	5	0.62	10	0.57	4	0.59
Schilhawsky 1960		67	0.45	86	0.00	80	0.04	64	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04
Shebanova 2002		18	0.63	7	0.01	27	0.07	38	0.18	62	0.04	43	0.08
Smith 1975		6	0.67	8	0.01	9	0.14	12	0.53	26	0.27	10	0.38
Sokolov 2002		44	0.54	27	0.00	40	0.07	36	0.19	50	0.05	36	0.10
Sztompka 1959		40	0.56	6	0.02	47	0.04	65	0.04	67	0.05	59	0.04
Tomsic 1995		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Uninsky 1932		68	0.44	70	0.00	73	0.02	85	0.02	71	0.04	80	0.03
Uninsky 1971		56	0.49	36	0.00	72	0.02	88	0.02	58	0.06	77	0.03
Wasowski 1980		54	0.49	62	0.00	45	0.04	57	0.04	54	0.05	52	0.04
Zak 1937		15	0.64	34	0.00	20	0.09	16	0.45	55	0.06	25	0.16
Zak 1951		12	0.65	40	0.00	11	0.13	10	0.55	36	0.15	16	0.29
Random 1		89	-0.09	74	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	32	0.26	46	0.07
Random 2		90	-0.25	87	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	89	0.01	90	0.01
Random 3		88	0.05	90	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	13	0.39	42	0.09

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).