Bunin 1987b

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		19	0.59	41	0.00	28	0.07	25	0.37	67	0.04	35	0.12
Anderszewski 2003		41	0.50	21	0.00	21	0.09	31	0.31	68	0.03	40	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		25	0.58	42	0.00	23	0.08	20	0.40	46	0.06	27	0.15
Bacha 2000		81	0.32	3	0.00	81	0.03	78	0.03	89	0.02	85	0.02
Badura 1965		34	0.53	43	0.00	14	0.10	19	0.41	23	0.36	12	0.38
Barbosa 1983		61	0.43	27	0.00	55	0.05	52	0.05	65	0.04	64	0.04
Biret 1990		58	0.44	28	0.00	64	0.05	54	0.05	88	0.03	70	0.04
Blet 2003		30	0.55	12	0.00	43	0.07	39	0.19	51	0.05	41	0.10
Block 1995		68	0.40	29	0.00	51	0.05	53	0.05	87	0.02	79	0.03
Blumental 1952		78	0.34	9	0.00	71	0.03	80	0.03	51	0.04	80	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		18	0.59	44	0.00	36	0.08	35	0.27	39	0.17	22	0.21
Brailowsky 1960		64	0.42	45	0.00	65	0.03	76	0.03	55	0.05	54	0.04
Bunin 1987		1	1.00	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Bunin 1987b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Chiu 1999		65	0.41	18	0.00	60	0.05	56	0.05	76	0.03	55	0.04
Cohen 1997		87	0.16	46	0.00	87	0.03	83	0.03	88	0.02	91	0.02
Cortot 1951		33	0.53	30	0.00	34	0.06	34	0.27	54	0.05	36	0.12
Csalog 1996		83	0.31	47	0.00	75	0.03	77	0.03	85	0.02	89	0.02
Czerny 1949		9	0.63	10	0.00	8	0.11	7	0.53	23	0.37	6	0.44
Czerny 1990		38	0.51	31	0.00	47	0.06	50	0.06	62	0.04	51	0.05
Duchoud 2007		21	0.58	48	0.00	29	0.07	22	0.39	23	0.35	13	0.37
Ezaki 2006		20	0.58	49	0.00	30	0.06	24	0.37	62	0.04	33	0.12
Falvay 1989		71	0.38	22	0.00	82	0.03	81	0.03	83	0.03	74	0.03
Farrell 1958		62	0.43	50	0.00	70	0.04	64	0.04	79	0.03	75	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		23	0.58	51	0.00	35	0.09	29	0.33	19	0.31	16	0.32
Fliere 1977		11	0.63	52	0.00	15	0.09	18	0.43	57	0.04	29	0.13
Fou 1978		51	0.47	53	0.00	63	0.04	66	0.04	68	0.04	60	0.04
Francois 1956		43	0.49	54	0.00	52	0.05	59	0.05	56	0.05	52	0.05
Friedman 1923		75	0.36	55	0.00	49	0.08	46	0.08	23	0.34	24	0.16
Friedman 1923b		73	0.37	23	0.00	48	0.06	49	0.06	26	0.30	32	0.13
Friedman 1930		55	0.46	24	0.00	24	0.06	32	0.31	26	0.36	14	0.33
Garcia 2007		56	0.45	56	0.00	57	0.04	74	0.04	59	0.04	67	0.04
Garcia 2007b		70	0.38	57	0.00	58	0.04	68	0.04	61	0.04	72	0.04
Gierzod 1998		35	0.53	58	0.00	46	0.06	48	0.06	79	0.03	66	0.04
Gornostaeva 1994		45	0.49	59	0.00	50	0.06	47	0.06	58	0.04	50	0.05
Groot 1988		28	0.57	60	0.00	20	0.08	30	0.33	47	0.06	28	0.14
Harasiewicz 1955		17	0.59	61	0.00	4	0.20	4	0.54	22	0.36	7	0.44
Hatto 1993		57	0.45	62	0.00	44	0.07	42	0.15	61	0.04	44	0.08
Hatto 1997		39	0.51	63	0.00	31	0.05	33	0.31	60	0.04	39	0.11
Horowitz 1949		16	0.61	4	0.00	22	0.08	21	0.40	23	0.40	10	0.40
Indjic 1988		50	0.48	64	0.00	38	0.06	38	0.21	51	0.06	38	0.11
Kapell 1951		5	0.65	13	0.00	11	0.18	9	0.51	30	0.28	11	0.38
Kissin 1993		52	0.47	25	0.00	67	0.05	60	0.05	78	0.03	63	0.04
Kushner 1989		49	0.48	14	0.00	59	0.04	62	0.04	81	0.03	76	0.03
Luisada 1991		53	0.47	32	0.00	66	0.04	72	0.04	84	0.03	73	0.03
Lushtak 2004		10	0.63	33	0.00	10	0.14	5	0.54	34	0.20	15	0.33
Malcuzynski 1961		26	0.57	11	0.00	19	0.09	17	0.43	41	0.11	21	0.22
Magaloff 1978		59	0.44	65	0.00	54	0.05	55	0.05	84	0.03	56	0.04
Magin 1975		42	0.50	6	0.00	40	0.06	44	0.13	63	0.04	46	0.07
Michalowski 1933		44	0.49	66	0.00	18	0.10	12	0.48	22	0.39	8	0.43
Milkina 1970		74	0.37	67	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	77	0.04	77	0.03
Mohovich 1999		31	0.55	15	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.17	74	0.03	48	0.07
Moravec 1969		85	0.29	16	0.00	84	0.02	85	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02
Morozova 2008		32	0.54	26	0.00	33	0.06	36	0.27	55	0.04	42	0.10
Neighaus 1950		8	0.64	68	0.00	9	0.11	11	0.51	51	0.06	23	0.17
Niedzielski 1931		69	0.39	69	0.00	68	0.04	71	0.04	60	0.04	58	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		29	0.56	70	0.00	32	0.06	27	0.33	58	0.04	37	0.11
Osinska 1989		63	0.42	71	0.00	72	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.04	53	0.04
Pachmann 1927		40	0.51	34	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.16	17	0.35	19	0.24
Paderewski 1930		48	0.49	72	0.00	53	0.05	51	0.05	80	0.03	62	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		24	0.58	73	0.00	26	0.07	23	0.38	54	0.04	34	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		72	0.37	74	0.00	78	0.04	75	0.04	65	0.04	57	0.04
Poblocka 1999		15	0.61	75	0.00	13	0.10	15	0.44	42	0.13	18	0.24
Rabcewiczowa 1932		60	0.44	76	0.00	61	0.04	65	0.04	61	0.04	59	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		27	0.57	35	0.00	17	0.08	14	0.45	31	0.20	17	0.30
Rangell 2001		76	0.36	77	0.00	74	0.04	61	0.04	87	0.03	81	0.03
Richter 1976		6	0.65	78	0.00	6	0.15	10	0.51	7	0.51	3	0.51
Rosen 1989		67	0.40	36	0.00	73	0.05	58	0.05	83	0.03	68	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		37	0.52	79	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.22	29	0.25	20	0.23
Rosenthal 1931		79	0.34	80	0.00	76	0.04	73	0.04	78	0.03	78	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		80	0.33	81	0.00	77	0.05	57	0.05	81	0.03	71	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		66	0.41	82	0.00	69	0.04	70	0.04	79	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		82	0.31	83	0.00	79	0.03	84	0.03	80	0.03	82	0.03
Rossi 2007		88	0.15	37	0.00	88	0.02	86	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		86	0.28	5	0.00	86	0.02	87	0.02	78	0.03	88	0.02
Rubinstein 1952		84	0.30	38	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	77	0.04	84	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		77	0.34	7	0.00	83	0.03	79	0.03	88	0.02	90	0.02
Schilhawsky 1960		3	0.69	17	0.00	2	0.27	3	0.57	13	0.45	4	0.51
Shebanova 2002		54	0.46	84	0.00	62	0.04	67	0.04	54	0.05	65	0.04
Smith 1975		36	0.53	85	0.00	39	0.05	43	0.15	60	0.04	43	0.08
Sokolov 2002		7	0.65	86	0.00	5	0.13	8	0.52	9	0.48	5	0.50
Sztompka 1959		22	0.58	19	0.00	27	0.07	26	0.36	55	0.06	25	0.15
Tomsic 1995		46	0.49	2	0.00	56	0.04	69	0.04	53	0.05	61	0.04
Uninsky 1932		13	0.62	87	0.00	12	0.13	13	0.46	24	0.41	9	0.43
Uninsky 1971		2	0.71	8	0.00	3	0.29	2	0.60	14	0.45	2	0.52
Wasowski 1980		47	0.49	39	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.11	78	0.04	45	0.07
Zak 1937		14	0.61	88	0.00	25	0.06	28	0.33	65	0.05	30	0.13
Zak 1951		12	0.62	40	0.00	16	0.09	16	0.43	69	0.04	31	0.13
Average		4	0.68	20	0.00	7	0.14	6	0.54	69	0.04	26	0.15
Random 1		90	-0.02	89	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	6	0.51	47	0.07
Random 2		91	-0.08	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	24	0.21	49	0.05
Random 3		89	0.00	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	32	0.19	69	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).