Bunin 1987

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		20	0.59	41	0.00	28	0.07	26	0.35	66	0.04	36	0.12
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.51	42	0.00	18	0.08	29	0.31	46	0.06	30	0.14
Ashkenazy 1981		25	0.58	10	0.00	23	0.08	22	0.38	63	0.04	37	0.12
Bacha 2000		80	0.33	4	0.00	81	0.03	79	0.03	73	0.04	71	0.03
Badura 1965		34	0.54	21	0.00	14	0.10	18	0.41	24	0.36	11	0.38
Barbosa 1983		61	0.44	43	0.00	55	0.05	51	0.05	46	0.07	48	0.06
Biret 1990		58	0.45	44	0.00	64	0.05	53	0.05	84	0.03	66	0.04
Blet 2003		31	0.55	13	0.00	43	0.07	40	0.18	52	0.05	42	0.09
Block 1995		67	0.40	17	0.00	51	0.05	54	0.05	68	0.03	63	0.04
Blumental 1952		78	0.35	11	0.00	71	0.03	76	0.03	49	0.04	83	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		21	0.59	45	0.00	36	0.07	36	0.23	41	0.16	23	0.19
Brailowsky 1960		64	0.43	22	0.00	65	0.03	80	0.03	57	0.05	52	0.04
Bunin 1987		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Bunin 1987b		1	1.00	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Chiu 1999		65	0.42	46	0.00	60	0.05	57	0.05	78	0.03	53	0.04
Cohen 1997		87	0.17	47	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	65	0.04	84	0.03
Cortot 1951		33	0.54	48	0.00	33	0.06	34	0.29	46	0.09	28	0.16
Csalog 1996		83	0.31	49	0.00	77	0.03	75	0.03	86	0.02	91	0.02
Czerny 1949		9	0.64	30	0.00	8	0.12	7	0.53	22	0.37	6	0.44
Czerny 1990		37	0.53	31	0.00	47	0.06	48	0.06	87	0.02	86	0.03
Duchoud 2007		22	0.59	15	0.00	29	0.07	21	0.39	24	0.34	13	0.36
Ezaki 2006		19	0.59	50	0.00	30	0.07	24	0.35	86	0.03	40	0.10
Falvay 1989		70	0.39	32	0.00	82	0.03	77	0.03	82	0.03	74	0.03
Farrell 1958		62	0.43	51	0.00	70	0.04	64	0.04	87	0.03	78	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		23	0.59	52	0.00	34	0.09	28	0.32	18	0.32	16	0.32
Fliere 1977		11	0.63	53	0.00	20	0.09	16	0.42	62	0.04	32	0.13
Fou 1978		51	0.48	54	0.00	63	0.04	67	0.04	66	0.04	56	0.04
Francois 1956		42	0.50	18	0.00	52	0.05	52	0.05	83	0.03	69	0.04
Friedman 1923		73	0.37	23	0.00	49	0.08	46	0.08	21	0.35	26	0.17
Friedman 1923b		72	0.38	33	0.00	48	0.06	49	0.06	25	0.31	31	0.14
Friedman 1930		54	0.47	55	0.00	24	0.06	32	0.30	25	0.36	14	0.33
Garcia 2007		56	0.46	56	0.00	57	0.04	73	0.04	58	0.05	62	0.04
Garcia 2007b		71	0.39	57	0.00	59	0.04	62	0.04	64	0.04	70	0.04
Gierzod 1998		35	0.54	58	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.11	73	0.03	49	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		43	0.50	12	0.00	50	0.06	47	0.06	84	0.02	85	0.03
Groot 1988		27	0.58	24	0.00	16	0.08	27	0.33	60	0.04	39	0.11
Harasiewicz 1955		17	0.60	34	0.00	4	0.20	6	0.53	23	0.36	7	0.44
Hatto 1993		57	0.46	59	0.00	44	0.07	43	0.16	59	0.04	44	0.08
Hatto 1997		40	0.52	60	0.00	35	0.08	33	0.29	51	0.05	35	0.12
Horowitz 1949		15	0.61	2	0.00	22	0.08	20	0.39	24	0.39	10	0.39
Indjic 1988		50	0.48	35	0.00	38	0.06	38	0.19	47	0.06	38	0.11
Kapell 1951		7	0.65	5	0.00	11	0.17	10	0.50	33	0.27	12	0.37
Kissin 1993		52	0.47	61	0.00	67	0.04	60	0.04	80	0.03	81	0.03
Kushner 1989		49	0.49	62	0.00	58	0.04	68	0.04	80	0.03	79	0.03
Luisada 1991		53	0.47	63	0.00	66	0.04	72	0.04	86	0.02	73	0.03
Lushtak 2004		10	0.64	64	0.00	9	0.11	4	0.54	33	0.20	15	0.33
Malcuzynski 1961		28	0.57	25	0.00	15	0.08	19	0.40	43	0.11	21	0.21
Magaloff 1978		59	0.45	19	0.00	54	0.05	55	0.05	78	0.03	54	0.04
Magin 1975		47	0.49	65	0.00	40	0.06	44	0.14	64	0.04	46	0.07
Michalowski 1933		48	0.49	66	0.00	17	0.08	12	0.47	23	0.38	9	0.42
Milkina 1970		74	0.37	3	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	73	0.04	80	0.03
Mohovich 1999		30	0.55	67	0.00	41	0.05	42	0.16	57	0.05	43	0.09
Moravec 1969		84	0.30	6	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	61	0.04	72	0.03
Morozova 2008		32	0.54	36	0.00	31	0.05	35	0.26	53	0.04	41	0.10
Neighaus 1950		8	0.64	68	0.00	10	0.16	11	0.50	46	0.09	22	0.21
Niedzielski 1931		69	0.40	69	0.00	68	0.04	71	0.04	58	0.04	55	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		29	0.57	70	0.00	32	0.06	31	0.30	49	0.05	34	0.12
Osinska 1989		63	0.43	8	0.00	72	0.04	61	0.04	70	0.04	51	0.04
Pachmann 1927		38	0.52	71	0.00	42	0.06	39	0.19	15	0.35	18	0.26
Paderewski 1930		46	0.49	72	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	51	0.04	58	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		18	0.60	37	0.00	26	0.07	25	0.35	46	0.08	25	0.17
Pierdomenico 2008		75	0.37	73	0.00	78	0.04	74	0.04	83	0.02	75	0.03
Poblocka 1999		16	0.61	74	0.00	13	0.10	15	0.43	43	0.13	19	0.24
Rabcewiczowa 1932		60	0.45	75	0.00	61	0.04	65	0.04	88	0.02	77	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		26	0.58	20	0.00	19	0.08	14	0.44	30	0.20	17	0.30
Rangell 2001		76	0.36	76	0.00	74	0.04	63	0.04	88	0.02	87	0.03
Richter 1976		6	0.65	77	0.00	6	0.15	9	0.51	8	0.51	3	0.51
Rosen 1989		68	0.40	26	0.00	73	0.05	58	0.05	77	0.03	64	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		39	0.52	78	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.20	27	0.25	20	0.22
Rosenthal 1931		79	0.34	79	0.00	75	0.03	78	0.03	47	0.05	59	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		81	0.33	80	0.00	76	0.04	59	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		66	0.41	81	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	46	0.05	68	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		82	0.32	82	0.00	79	0.03	84	0.03	72	0.04	88	0.03
Rossi 2007		88	0.17	27	0.00	88	0.02	86	0.02	85	0.03	90	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		86	0.29	16	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	70	0.04	76	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		85	0.30	83	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	61	0.05	89	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		77	0.35	28	0.00	83	0.03	81	0.03	73	0.04	82	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		3	0.69	14	0.00	2	0.28	3	0.57	15	0.45	4	0.51
Shebanova 2002		55	0.46	38	0.00	62	0.04	70	0.04	51	0.05	60	0.04
Smith 1975		36	0.53	39	0.00	39	0.05	41	0.18	82	0.03	45	0.07
Sokolov 2002		5	0.65	29	0.00	5	0.14	8	0.52	7	0.48	5	0.50
Sztompka 1959		24	0.59	84	0.00	27	0.07	23	0.35	46	0.09	24	0.18
Tomsic 1995		44	0.50	85	0.00	56	0.04	66	0.04	62	0.04	57	0.04
Uninsky 1932		13	0.62	86	0.00	12	0.13	13	0.46	25	0.40	8	0.43
Uninsky 1971		2	0.71	87	0.00	3	0.29	2	0.59	15	0.45	2	0.52
Wasowski 1980		45	0.50	7	0.00	46	0.06	50	0.06	70	0.04	50	0.05
Zak 1937		14	0.61	9	0.00	25	0.06	30	0.30	51	0.06	33	0.13
Zak 1951		12	0.62	40	0.00	21	0.12	17	0.42	54	0.06	27	0.16
Average		4	0.69	88	0.00	7	0.13	5	0.54	70	0.04	29	0.15
Random 1		90	-0.02	89	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	5	0.51	47	0.07
Random 2		91	-0.08	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	27	0.20	61	0.04
Random 3		89	0.00	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	30	0.20	65	0.04

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).