Kissin 1993

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		6	0.77	8	0.03	9	0.22	8	0.62	7	0.52	7	0.57
Anderszewski 2003		65	0.53	88	0.00	72	0.04	59	0.04	74	0.03	86	0.03
Ashkenazy 1981		34	0.65	16	0.01	21	0.07	28	0.24	31	0.26	34	0.25
Bacha 2000		73	0.49	89	0.00	55	0.05	54	0.05	62	0.05	63	0.05
Badura 1965		43	0.63	20	0.00	43	0.05	39	0.14	8	0.46	33	0.25
Barbosa 1983		82	0.43	48	0.00	76	0.03	76	0.03	70	0.04	85	0.03
Biret 1990		49	0.60	63	0.00	53	0.06	48	0.06	48	0.06	62	0.06
Blet 2003		31	0.66	47	0.00	36	0.05	45	0.10	28	0.26	43	0.16
Block 1995		38	0.64	42	0.00	52	0.05	53	0.05	19	0.34	47	0.13
Blumental 1952		77	0.47	52	0.00	59	0.03	75	0.03	68	0.03	88	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		11	0.74	6	0.04	12	0.16	15	0.43	7	0.57	12	0.50
Brailowsky 1960		48	0.60	57	0.00	58	0.06	52	0.06	29	0.30	46	0.13
Bunin 1987		74	0.47	77	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	60	0.04	89	0.03
Bunin 1987b		76	0.47	78	0.00	83	0.03	78	0.03	60	0.05	72	0.04
Chiu 1999		63	0.55	43	0.00	48	0.05	55	0.05	30	0.25	53	0.11
Cohen 1997		86	0.34	50	0.00	86	0.04	61	0.04	53	0.05	79	0.04
Cortot 1951		59	0.56	80	0.00	78	0.03	88	0.03	56	0.05	81	0.04
Csalog 1996		67	0.52	19	0.01	44	0.05	43	0.12	11	0.45	36	0.23
Czerny 1949		46	0.62	68	0.00	33	0.05	35	0.16	57	0.05	58	0.09
Czerny 1990		12	0.74	15	0.01	16	0.10	14	0.45	19	0.41	16	0.43
Duchoud 2007		71	0.50	71	0.00	74	0.04	63	0.04	61	0.04	76	0.04
Ezaki 2006		8	0.75	25	0.00	14	0.11	12	0.48	16	0.39	15	0.43
Falvay 1989		25	0.69	22	0.00	41	0.06	41	0.14	20	0.40	35	0.24
Farrell 1958		62	0.56	75	0.00	65	0.03	83	0.03	53	0.06	70	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		72	0.50	86	0.00	85	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.03	87	0.03
Fliere 1977		3	0.79	3	0.14	3	0.17	4	0.70	3	0.55	5	0.62
Fou 1978		4	0.79	1	0.23	1	0.23	5	0.69	2	0.66	3	0.67
Francois 1956		41	0.63	45	0.00	38	0.07	34	0.17	29	0.31	38	0.23
Friedman 1923		87	0.27	79	0.00	88	0.03	70	0.03	71	0.05	82	0.04
Friedman 1923b		88	0.27	73	0.00	87	0.04	67	0.04	67	0.05	80	0.04
Friedman 1930		84	0.38	69	0.00	81	0.03	79	0.03	61	0.05	74	0.04
Garcia 2007		70	0.50	83	0.00	77	0.03	85	0.03	56	0.05	77	0.04
Garcia 2007b		85	0.36	87	0.00	82	0.03	87	0.03	63	0.04	90	0.03
Gierzod 1998		17	0.72	5	0.06	7	0.13	11	0.52	10	0.50	10	0.51
Gornostaeva 1994		33	0.65	66	0.00	37	0.05	38	0.15	29	0.28	39	0.20
Groot 1988		32	0.65	62	0.00	46	0.05	56	0.05	31	0.35	50	0.13
Harasiewicz 1955		30	0.66	21	0.00	15	0.12	16	0.42	28	0.31	20	0.36
Hatto 1993		80	0.45	65	0.00	35	0.06	37	0.15	23	0.26	40	0.20
Hatto 1997		75	0.47	24	0.00	54	0.06	50	0.06	40	0.11	60	0.08
Horowitz 1949		36	0.65	14	0.01	31	0.05	31	0.19	13	0.51	29	0.31
Indjic 1988		78	0.46	59	0.00	34	0.06	33	0.17	25	0.22	41	0.19
Kapell 1951		54	0.58	49	0.00	67	0.04	64	0.04	58	0.04	71	0.04
Kissin 1993		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Kushner 1989		7	0.76	11	0.02	11	0.16	9	0.56	9	0.49	9	0.52
Luisada 1991		18	0.71	10	0.02	8	0.17	13	0.48	5	0.52	11	0.50
Lushtak 2004		35	0.65	44	0.00	47	0.06	46	0.06	52	0.05	68	0.05
Malcuzynski 1961		23	0.70	30	0.00	30	0.07	27	0.27	9	0.45	21	0.35
Magaloff 1978		22	0.70	34	0.00	20	0.07	22	0.36	5	0.50	17	0.42
Magin 1975		15	0.72	18	0.01	13	0.13	10	0.53	5	0.52	8	0.52
Michalowski 1933		83	0.41	91	0.00	80	0.03	84	0.03	50	0.07	66	0.05
Milkina 1970		5	0.79	9	0.02	5	0.24	2	0.73	2	0.70	1	0.71
Mohovich 1999		21	0.70	55	0.00	23	0.07	21	0.37	29	0.32	23	0.34
Moravec 1969		55	0.57	82	0.00	73	0.06	49	0.06	27	0.34	45	0.14
Morozova 2008		20	0.70	67	0.00	24	0.08	20	0.38	19	0.30	22	0.34
Neighaus 1950		27	0.68	61	0.00	17	0.08	18	0.39	29	0.27	27	0.32
Niedzielski 1931		66	0.53	81	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.11	22	0.30	42	0.18
Ohlsson 1999		44	0.62	26	0.00	22	0.08	23	0.32	24	0.33	26	0.32
Osinska 1989		13	0.73	35	0.00	19	0.07	19	0.39	20	0.39	19	0.39
Pachmann 1927		51	0.59	56	0.00	60	0.03	72	0.03	10	0.40	55	0.11
Paderewski 1930		39	0.64	17	0.01	51	0.06	47	0.06	26	0.22	54	0.11
Perlemuter 1992		19	0.71	37	0.00	25	0.06	25	0.30	19	0.35	24	0.32
Pierdomenico 2008		37	0.65	40	0.00	42	0.06	40	0.14	9	0.46	32	0.25
Poblocka 1999		16	0.72	23	0.00	26	0.07	26	0.29	21	0.32	30	0.30
Rabcewiczowa 1932		57	0.57	84	0.00	66	0.03	74	0.03	64	0.04	84	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		53	0.58	54	0.00	39	0.06	42	0.12	42	0.12	51	0.12
Rangell 2001		61	0.56	31	0.00	50	0.05	57	0.05	24	0.33	48	0.13
Richter 1976		26	0.68	32	0.00	32	0.07	30	0.22	10	0.48	25	0.32
Rosen 1989		14	0.72	51	0.00	18	0.08	17	0.41	19	0.42	18	0.41
Rosenthal 1930		60	0.56	60	0.00	68	0.03	86	0.03	28	0.25	59	0.09
Rosenthal 1931		68	0.52	53	0.00	69	0.03	77	0.03	18	0.44	56	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		69	0.50	76	0.00	71	0.04	60	0.04	18	0.37	52	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		58	0.57	27	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	17	0.43	44	0.15
Rosenthal 1931d		64	0.54	74	0.00	70	0.04	65	0.04	17	0.43	49	0.13
Rossi 2007		79	0.46	70	0.00	79	0.03	73	0.03	43	0.10	64	0.05
Rubinstein 1939		81	0.43	38	0.00	75	0.04	66	0.04	32	0.27	57	0.10
Rubinstein 1952		29	0.66	13	0.01	28	0.07	24	0.31	2	0.67	14	0.46
Rubinstein 1966		42	0.63	29	0.00	29	0.07	36	0.16	14	0.53	31	0.29
Schilhawsky 1960		40	0.63	33	0.00	27	0.06	29	0.24	40	0.22	37	0.23
Shebanova 2002		2	0.81	2	0.17	2	0.25	1	0.74	2	0.68	2	0.71
Smith 1975		28	0.67	36	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	52	0.05	65	0.05
Sokolov 2002		47	0.60	58	0.00	61	0.03	71	0.03	59	0.04	83	0.03
Sztompka 1959		45	0.62	46	0.00	62	0.04	68	0.04	73	0.04	73	0.04
Tomsic 1995		24	0.70	28	0.00	40	0.06	32	0.18	12	0.54	28	0.31
Uninsky 1932		56	0.57	41	0.00	64	0.04	69	0.04	60	0.05	75	0.04
Uninsky 1971		52	0.59	39	0.00	63	0.03	82	0.03	49	0.07	67	0.05
Wasowski 1980		50	0.59	64	0.00	57	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.05	69	0.04
Zak 1937		10	0.74	12	0.02	10	0.17	7	0.64	5	0.61	6	0.62
Zak 1951		9	0.75	7	0.03	6	0.18	6	0.67	3	0.65	4	0.66
Average		1	0.82	4	0.08	4	0.20	3	0.71	26	0.34	13	0.49
Random 1		91	-0.13	90	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	38	0.20	78	0.04
Random 2		89	-0.11	85	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	28	0.18	61	0.06
Random 3		90	-0.12	72	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	81	0.02	91	0.01

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).