Lushtak 2004

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		85	0.22	85	0.00	86	0.04	65	0.04	84	0.03	88	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		18	0.42	15	0.01	10	0.11	8	0.63	10	0.64	7	0.63
Ashkenazy 1981		69	0.30	59	0.00	39	0.04	44	0.07	60	0.06	66	0.06
Bacha 2000		68	0.30	88	0.00	75	0.03	87	0.03	38	0.19	50	0.08
Badura 1965		67	0.30	63	0.00	33	0.06	37	0.10	22	0.34	33	0.18
Barbosa 1983		3	0.49	2	0.09	5	0.15	16	0.53	22	0.40	19	0.46
Biret 1990		50	0.33	55	0.00	46	0.06	48	0.06	38	0.22	46	0.11
Blet 2003		71	0.29	48	0.00	67	0.04	74	0.04	50	0.05	77	0.04
Block 1995		12	0.43	21	0.01	20	0.15	21	0.47	24	0.47	18	0.47
Blumental 1952		40	0.35	89	0.00	57	0.05	52	0.05	66	0.05	70	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		11	0.44	24	0.00	8	0.10	9	0.61	22	0.45	13	0.52
Brailowsky 1960		31	0.38	53	0.00	34	0.06	34	0.16	26	0.40	29	0.25
Bunin 1987		39	0.35	62	0.00	30	0.08	32	0.21	21	0.42	28	0.30
Bunin 1987b		47	0.35	77	0.00	29	0.08	31	0.23	17	0.45	26	0.32
Chiu 1999		29	0.38	34	0.00	41	0.05	38	0.10	50	0.05	53	0.07
Cohen 1997		42	0.35	66	0.00	45	0.05	56	0.05	13	0.58	34	0.17
Cortot 1951		60	0.31	44	0.00	66	0.04	73	0.04	43	0.13	57	0.07
Csalog 1996		46	0.35	27	0.00	42	0.04	40	0.08	41	0.12	48	0.10
Czerny 1949		61	0.30	86	0.00	76	0.03	85	0.03	53	0.06	79	0.04
Czerny 1990		44	0.35	68	0.00	58	0.04	64	0.04	77	0.04	80	0.04
Duchoud 2007		55	0.32	82	0.00	51	0.05	62	0.05	22	0.34	41	0.13
Ezaki 2006		22	0.41	64	0.00	28	0.06	26	0.32	34	0.40	23	0.36
Falvay 1989		13	0.43	9	0.01	21	0.13	19	0.50	27	0.32	20	0.40
Farrell 1958		14	0.43	13	0.01	13	0.16	13	0.55	7	0.57	9	0.56
Ferenczy 1958		57	0.32	22	0.01	64	0.04	67	0.04	28	0.54	38	0.15
Fliere 1977		15	0.43	30	0.00	15	0.12	12	0.57	40	0.21	24	0.35
Fou 1978		24	0.40	47	0.00	19	0.15	17	0.53	24	0.42	17	0.47
Francois 1956		70	0.30	75	0.00	69	0.05	61	0.05	26	0.31	45	0.12
Friedman 1923		51	0.33	73	0.00	62	0.04	72	0.04	42	0.11	58	0.07
Friedman 1923b		59	0.31	81	0.00	63	0.05	49	0.05	43	0.13	51	0.08
Friedman 1930		54	0.32	51	0.00	61	0.05	57	0.05	52	0.06	68	0.05
Garcia 2007		73	0.29	57	0.00	72	0.05	54	0.05	47	0.06	69	0.05
Garcia 2007b		65	0.30	83	0.00	53	0.05	53	0.05	31	0.23	47	0.11
Gierzod 1998		5	0.47	3	0.05	3	0.17	3	0.70	7	0.65	3	0.67
Gornostaeva 1994		27	0.39	35	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.14	36	0.26	31	0.19
Groot 1988		62	0.30	11	0.01	36	0.06	36	0.13	56	0.05	52	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		9	0.46	42	0.00	24	0.10	22	0.42	63	0.05	40	0.14
Hatto 1993		45	0.35	84	0.00	59	0.04	66	0.04	69	0.04	81	0.04
Hatto 1997		33	0.37	52	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	45	0.06	65	0.06
Horowitz 1949		82	0.24	39	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	83	0.03	85	0.03
Indjic 1988		49	0.34	60	0.00	60	0.05	60	0.05	47	0.08	64	0.06
Kapell 1951		25	0.40	41	0.00	27	0.08	27	0.32	47	0.08	37	0.16
Kissin 1993		19	0.42	43	0.00	17	0.11	11	0.57	18	0.59	8	0.58
Kushner 1989		2	0.51	6	0.03	2	0.17	2	0.75	11	0.60	2	0.67
Luisada 1991		64	0.30	90	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	70	0.05	72	0.04
Lushtak 2004		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Malcuzynski 1961		4	0.49	23	0.00	4	0.12	4	0.69	7	0.62	5	0.65
Magaloff 1978		20	0.42	5	0.04	14	0.11	15	0.53	13	0.50	14	0.51
Magin 1975		48	0.34	37	0.00	54	0.06	46	0.06	56	0.05	67	0.05
Michalowski 1933		87	0.11	46	0.00	87	0.03	84	0.03	79	0.03	87	0.03
Milkina 1970		74	0.29	78	0.00	65	0.04	70	0.04	68	0.04	75	0.04
Mohovich 1999		17	0.43	20	0.01	22	0.14	23	0.38	30	0.38	22	0.38
Moravec 1969		41	0.35	38	0.00	40	0.04	42	0.07	61	0.05	59	0.06
Morozova 2008		30	0.38	10	0.01	38	0.05	39	0.10	63	0.05	54	0.07
Neighaus 1950		36	0.37	70	0.00	44	0.04	41	0.08	41	0.18	44	0.12
Niedzielski 1931		84	0.23	58	0.00	85	0.04	63	0.04	84	0.03	84	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		32	0.38	26	0.00	25	0.11	24	0.37	26	0.31	25	0.34
Osinska 1989		10	0.44	18	0.01	11	0.12	10	0.60	20	0.50	11	0.55
Pachmann 1927		76	0.28	54	0.00	73	0.04	75	0.04	46	0.08	62	0.06
Paderewski 1930		86	0.19	71	0.00	82	0.03	76	0.03	65	0.04	86	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		75	0.28	61	0.00	68	0.03	77	0.03	53	0.06	73	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		78	0.28	79	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	45	0.06	74	0.04
Poblocka 1999		16	0.43	14	0.01	16	0.13	18	0.51	25	0.46	16	0.48
Rabcewiczowa 1932		38	0.36	69	0.00	23	0.11	25	0.35	25	0.45	21	0.40
Rachmaninoff 1923		77	0.28	56	0.00	78	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03
Rangell 2001		21	0.41	8	0.02	12	0.13	20	0.50	8	0.59	12	0.54
Richter 1976		26	0.39	12	0.01	32	0.07	30	0.25	54	0.06	43	0.12
Rosen 1989		28	0.39	29	0.00	31	0.11	28	0.30	46	0.06	42	0.13
Rosenthal 1930		79	0.26	28	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	68	0.04	89	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		52	0.32	65	0.00	50	0.05	59	0.05	16	0.63	32	0.18
Rosenthal 1931b		66	0.30	32	0.00	56	0.05	58	0.05	17	0.58	35	0.17
Rosenthal 1931c		72	0.29	72	0.00	70	0.04	71	0.04	34	0.22	49	0.09
Rosenthal 1931d		83	0.24	36	0.00	81	0.03	80	0.03	37	0.16	56	0.07
Rossi 2007		81	0.25	31	0.00	71	0.04	68	0.04	12	0.48	39	0.14
Rubinstein 1939		56	0.32	67	0.00	52	0.05	50	0.05	44	0.08	61	0.06
Rubinstein 1952		23	0.41	19	0.01	18	0.13	14	0.54	28	0.46	15	0.50
Rubinstein 1966		1	0.55	1	0.54	1	0.53	1	0.78	8	0.69	1	0.73
Schilhawsky 1960		34	0.37	7	0.02	26	0.11	29	0.25	17	0.40	27	0.32
Shebanova 2002		7	0.47	16	0.01	9	0.13	6	0.65	21	0.48	10	0.56
Smith 1975		35	0.37	45	0.00	48	0.07	45	0.07	26	0.38	36	0.16
Sokolov 2002		80	0.25	76	0.00	80	0.03	83	0.03	76	0.03	82	0.03
Sztompka 1959		58	0.31	49	0.00	74	0.04	69	0.04	77	0.04	76	0.04
Tomsic 1995		53	0.32	74	0.00	35	0.06	33	0.17	27	0.27	30	0.21
Uninsky 1932		63	0.30	17	0.01	55	0.05	51	0.05	61	0.04	78	0.04
Uninsky 1971		37	0.36	40	0.00	49	0.05	55	0.05	47	0.07	63	0.06
Wasowski 1980		43	0.35	33	0.00	43	0.04	43	0.07	48	0.06	60	0.06
Zak 1937		8	0.46	4	0.04	7	0.14	7	0.63	5	0.65	6	0.64
Zak 1951		6	0.47	25	0.00	6	0.15	5	0.67	5	0.65	4	0.66
Random 1		90	-0.08	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	82	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		88	0.04	50	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	29	0.23	55	0.07
Random 3		89	-0.06	87	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	39	0.14	71	0.05

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).