Milkina 1970

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		16	0.71	17	0.01	25	0.07	18	0.38	25	0.36	23	0.37
Anderszewski 2003		47	0.61	57	0.00	63	0.05	52	0.05	57	0.04	77	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		51	0.61	38	0.00	51	0.06	50	0.06	49	0.05	73	0.05
Bacha 2000		17	0.71	11	0.01	13	0.11	15	0.45	2	0.61	7	0.52
Badura 1965		69	0.53	50	0.00	64	0.05	59	0.05	48	0.06	72	0.05
Barbosa 1983		80	0.44	71	0.00	57	0.04	69	0.04	60	0.05	76	0.04
Biret 1990		12	0.72	13	0.01	15	0.13	10	0.52	4	0.52	9	0.52
Blet 2003		48	0.61	79	0.00	68	0.04	85	0.04	41	0.11	58	0.07
Block 1995		32	0.66	37	0.00	34	0.08	30	0.25	10	0.40	28	0.32
Blumental 1952		75	0.47	7	0.02	53	0.05	57	0.05	42	0.11	59	0.07
Boshniakovich 1969		36	0.65	68	0.00	36	0.05	33	0.21	24	0.33	34	0.26
Brailowsky 1960		13	0.72	41	0.00	33	0.10	21	0.37	9	0.52	17	0.44
Bunin 1987		83	0.37	78	0.00	86	0.04	73	0.04	82	0.03	90	0.03
Bunin 1987b		85	0.37	91	0.00	85	0.04	77	0.04	82	0.03	86	0.03
Chiu 1999		67	0.53	81	0.00	35	0.06	35	0.19	21	0.37	33	0.27
Cohen 1997		78	0.45	62	0.00	43	0.05	45	0.09	7	0.48	42	0.21
Cortot 1951		63	0.57	74	0.00	79	0.04	71	0.04	53	0.05	83	0.04
Csalog 1996		46	0.62	65	0.00	37	0.05	41	0.12	8	0.51	37	0.25
Czerny 1949		65	0.55	25	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.09	42	0.08	53	0.08
Czerny 1990		23	0.70	14	0.01	23	0.07	25	0.33	24	0.29	30	0.31
Duchoud 2007		62	0.57	86	0.00	69	0.04	84	0.04	53	0.05	80	0.04
Ezaki 2006		18	0.71	53	0.00	28	0.07	22	0.34	32	0.28	29	0.31
Falvay 1989		14	0.72	35	0.00	30	0.07	26	0.32	8	0.59	20	0.43
Farrell 1958		26	0.68	87	0.00	41	0.07	37	0.16	13	0.37	39	0.24
Ferenczy 1958		71	0.52	45	0.00	83	0.05	53	0.05	64	0.04	79	0.04
Fliere 1977		10	0.74	31	0.00	12	0.11	7	0.54	24	0.32	21	0.42
Fou 1978		6	0.76	1	0.26	1	0.25	3	0.64	3	0.65	2	0.64
Francois 1956		37	0.65	36	0.00	54	0.05	67	0.05	41	0.13	55	0.08
Friedman 1923		87	0.24	88	0.00	88	0.03	87	0.03	73	0.05	85	0.04
Friedman 1923b		88	0.24	85	0.00	87	0.04	86	0.04	73	0.04	82	0.04
Friedman 1930		86	0.29	64	0.00	84	0.03	88	0.03	71	0.04	87	0.03
Garcia 2007		74	0.49	82	0.00	77	0.04	83	0.04	50	0.05	81	0.04
Garcia 2007b		84	0.37	80	0.00	78	0.04	78	0.04	58	0.05	84	0.04
Gierzod 1998		24	0.69	6	0.02	14	0.10	27	0.32	22	0.35	26	0.33
Gornostaeva 1994		20	0.70	47	0.00	32	0.08	24	0.33	20	0.38	24	0.35
Groot 1988		15	0.71	59	0.00	24	0.07	20	0.38	25	0.41	22	0.39
Harasiewicz 1955		54	0.59	9	0.01	22	0.07	23	0.34	33	0.23	32	0.28
Hatto 1993		79	0.44	69	0.00	72	0.04	79	0.04	32	0.18	54	0.08
Hatto 1997		76	0.47	42	0.00	74	0.05	65	0.05	61	0.04	78	0.04
Horowitz 1949		40	0.64	48	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.12	18	0.45	40	0.23
Indjic 1988		77	0.46	51	0.00	73	0.05	64	0.05	40	0.13	52	0.08
Kapell 1951		42	0.63	15	0.01	61	0.04	70	0.04	73	0.04	74	0.04
Kissin 1993		2	0.79	3	0.13	2	0.27	2	0.70	2	0.73	1	0.71
Kushner 1989		8	0.75	63	0.00	16	0.10	13	0.49	15	0.46	14	0.47
Luisada 1991		28	0.67	4	0.09	4	0.17	14	0.47	11	0.49	13	0.48
Lushtak 2004		66	0.54	40	0.00	70	0.04	68	0.04	79	0.03	88	0.03
Malcuzynski 1961		11	0.74	43	0.00	31	0.07	31	0.24	10	0.43	27	0.32
Magaloff 1978		9	0.75	52	0.00	21	0.08	16	0.41	7	0.48	18	0.44
Magin 1975		39	0.65	23	0.00	27	0.07	29	0.29	19	0.30	31	0.29
Michalowski 1933		82	0.40	72	0.00	82	0.05	56	0.05	59	0.06	69	0.05
Milkina 1970		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Mohovich 1999		4	0.76	12	0.01	9	0.12	11	0.51	9	0.53	8	0.52
Moravec 1969		29	0.67	21	0.01	45	0.05	43	0.09	5	0.55	41	0.22
Morozova 2008		55	0.59	28	0.00	20	0.07	32	0.24	20	0.27	38	0.25
Neighaus 1950		33	0.66	49	0.00	52	0.07	46	0.07	47	0.08	61	0.07
Niedzielski 1931		64	0.57	75	0.00	67	0.04	80	0.04	36	0.15	51	0.08
Ohlsson 1999		31	0.66	54	0.00	26	0.07	36	0.17	37	0.17	44	0.17
Osinska 1989		5	0.76	27	0.00	6	0.14	4	0.60	3	0.65	3	0.62
Pachmann 1927		58	0.59	84	0.00	65	0.04	74	0.04	12	0.38	49	0.12
Paderewski 1930		50	0.61	34	0.00	60	0.04	72	0.04	50	0.04	75	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		43	0.63	32	0.00	50	0.05	63	0.05	40	0.11	56	0.07
Pierdomenico 2008		57	0.59	67	0.00	39	0.05	38	0.15	16	0.43	36	0.25
Poblocka 1999		38	0.65	60	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	52	0.06	65	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		56	0.59	66	0.00	58	0.04	82	0.04	45	0.10	62	0.06
Rachmaninoff 1923		60	0.58	10	0.01	46	0.05	51	0.05	44	0.12	50	0.08
Rangell 2001		21	0.70	5	0.03	5	0.11	17	0.39	2	0.55	16	0.46
Richter 1976		68	0.53	73	0.00	76	0.04	76	0.04	50	0.06	67	0.05
Rosen 1989		7	0.76	55	0.00	8	0.11	8	0.53	6	0.56	6	0.54
Rosenthal 1930		59	0.58	90	0.00	71	0.04	81	0.04	45	0.08	64	0.06
Rosenthal 1931		49	0.61	46	0.00	47	0.05	60	0.05	9	0.57	45	0.17
Rosenthal 1931b		52	0.60	33	0.00	48	0.07	47	0.07	10	0.52	43	0.19
Rosenthal 1931c		44	0.62	26	0.00	55	0.05	55	0.05	16	0.45	46	0.15
Rosenthal 1931d		34	0.65	29	0.00	38	0.06	40	0.13	9	0.51	35	0.26
Rossi 2007		81	0.42	83	0.00	66	0.05	62	0.05	16	0.37	47	0.14
Rubinstein 1939		61	0.57	8	0.02	19	0.08	34	0.20	3	0.59	25	0.34
Rubinstein 1952		25	0.68	22	0.01	18	0.12	6	0.57	5	0.62	4	0.59
Rubinstein 1966		19	0.71	20	0.01	17	0.10	19	0.38	7	0.62	12	0.49
Schilhawsky 1960		70	0.53	44	0.00	75	0.06	48	0.06	66	0.04	70	0.05
Shebanova 2002		3	0.77	24	0.00	7	0.11	5	0.57	10	0.55	5	0.56
Smith 1975		35	0.65	58	0.00	40	0.06	39	0.14	59	0.04	57	0.07
Sokolov 2002		45	0.62	30	0.00	62	0.05	61	0.05	47	0.05	66	0.05
Sztompka 1959		53	0.59	19	0.01	59	0.04	75	0.04	54	0.06	68	0.05
Tomsic 1995		22	0.70	56	0.00	29	0.07	28	0.32	7	0.61	19	0.44
Uninsky 1932		73	0.49	61	0.00	81	0.05	54	0.05	53	0.06	71	0.05
Uninsky 1971		72	0.52	39	0.00	80	0.06	49	0.06	47	0.07	63	0.06
Wasowski 1980		41	0.64	76	0.00	49	0.05	66	0.05	18	0.31	48	0.12
Zak 1937		27	0.68	16	0.01	11	0.13	12	0.51	11	0.47	11	0.49
Zak 1951		30	0.66	18	0.01	10	0.09	9	0.52	13	0.43	15	0.47
Average		1	0.82	2	0.21	3	0.33	1	0.75	23	0.35	10	0.51
Random 1		91	-0.11	89	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	13	0.43	60	0.07
Random 2		90	-0.10	70	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	57	0.04	91	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.01	77	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	45	0.07	89	0.03

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).