Magaloff 1978

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		68	0.33	81	0.00	71	0.03	82	0.03	38	0.17	64	0.07
Anderszewski 2003		74	0.31	47	0.00	72	0.03	84	0.03	56	0.06	77	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		59	0.35	86	0.00	68	0.03	85	0.03	62	0.06	80	0.04
Bacha 2000		73	0.31	53	0.00	74	0.03	77	0.03	45	0.07	67	0.05
Badura 1965		79	0.29	54	0.00	78	0.03	86	0.03	58	0.04	88	0.03
Barbosa 1983		43	0.39	32	0.00	46	0.05	52	0.05	58	0.06	71	0.05
Biret 1990		48	0.37	36	0.00	55	0.05	53	0.05	34	0.33	50	0.13
Blet 2003		78	0.29	75	0.00	84	0.04	66	0.04	73	0.03	86	0.03
Block 1995		10	0.47	38	0.00	19	0.10	15	0.48	21	0.48	15	0.48
Blumental 1952		52	0.36	71	0.00	62	0.05	47	0.05	51	0.06	72	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		9	0.47	2	0.04	2	0.14	10	0.55	19	0.48	13	0.51
Brailowsky 1960		26	0.42	10	0.01	39	0.06	37	0.18	21	0.55	29	0.31
Bunin 1987		63	0.33	87	0.00	60	0.05	51	0.05	40	0.14	61	0.08
Bunin 1987b		69	0.33	88	0.00	59	0.04	65	0.04	45	0.09	65	0.06
Chiu 1999		34	0.40	69	0.00	24	0.08	24	0.38	18	0.42	24	0.40
Cohen 1997		60	0.34	39	0.00	75	0.03	72	0.03	33	0.39	55	0.11
Cortot 1951		36	0.40	44	0.00	29	0.06	26	0.33	2	0.71	16	0.48
Csalog 1996		39	0.39	21	0.00	33	0.06	34	0.22	29	0.23	37	0.22
Czerny 1949		77	0.29	57	0.00	73	0.03	80	0.03	42	0.19	60	0.08
Czerny 1990		57	0.35	17	0.01	37	0.06	41	0.14	40	0.17	48	0.15
Duchoud 2007		81	0.28	83	0.00	83	0.03	70	0.03	54	0.06	79	0.04
Ezaki 2006		21	0.42	20	0.00	30	0.06	31	0.27	38	0.34	31	0.30
Falvay 1989		62	0.33	5	0.02	48	0.05	56	0.05	68	0.05	69	0.05
Farrell 1958		75	0.31	84	0.00	70	0.02	87	0.02	63	0.05	83	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		87	0.19	62	0.00	87	0.04	67	0.04	63	0.05	78	0.04
Fliere 1977		1	0.60	1	0.67	1	0.66	1	0.85	1	0.78	1	0.81
Fou 1978		45	0.38	24	0.00	47	0.04	60	0.04	44	0.11	63	0.07
Francois 1956		66	0.33	66	0.00	76	0.03	68	0.03	25	0.32	56	0.10
Friedman 1923		23	0.42	48	0.00	23	0.10	19	0.40	10	0.64	14	0.51
Friedman 1923b		27	0.42	19	0.01	21	0.10	23	0.38	14	0.58	17	0.47
Friedman 1930		54	0.36	33	0.00	41	0.06	38	0.15	28	0.37	36	0.24
Garcia 2007		82	0.28	76	0.00	67	0.03	78	0.03	69	0.04	87	0.03
Garcia 2007b		83	0.28	61	0.00	69	0.03	81	0.03	51	0.05	82	0.04
Gierzod 1998		16	0.44	23	0.00	12	0.16	11	0.53	13	0.54	11	0.53
Gornostaeva 1994		12	0.46	9	0.02	18	0.11	20	0.39	17	0.54	19	0.46
Groot 1988		14	0.45	12	0.01	11	0.18	14	0.49	19	0.41	20	0.45
Harasiewicz 1955		11	0.46	41	0.00	16	0.08	12	0.51	37	0.22	26	0.33
Hatto 1993		38	0.40	63	0.00	28	0.06	28	0.28	35	0.18	38	0.22
Hatto 1997		55	0.35	68	0.00	49	0.05	48	0.05	40	0.14	59	0.08
Horowitz 1949		49	0.37	80	0.00	63	0.05	49	0.05	21	0.50	43	0.16
Indjic 1988		46	0.38	64	0.00	44	0.07	39	0.14	42	0.16	45	0.15
Kapell 1951		70	0.33	77	0.00	80	0.03	73	0.03	62	0.05	75	0.04
Kissin 1993		33	0.40	25	0.00	27	0.07	27	0.32	24	0.53	23	0.41
Kushner 1989		15	0.44	65	0.00	25	0.07	22	0.39	45	0.09	41	0.19
Luisada 1991		50	0.37	26	0.00	64	0.05	54	0.05	68	0.05	68	0.05
Lushtak 2004		25	0.42	7	0.02	13	0.18	13	0.50	15	0.53	12	0.51
Malcuzynski 1961		7	0.49	18	0.01	4	0.16	2	0.70	6	0.63	2	0.66
Magaloff 1978		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Magin 1975		37	0.40	74	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.07	34	0.31	44	0.15
Michalowski 1933		64	0.33	15	0.01	40	0.06	40	0.14	11	0.47	34	0.26
Milkina 1970		80	0.28	78	0.00	65	0.03	69	0.03	53	0.06	76	0.04
Mohovich 1999		40	0.39	59	0.00	54	0.07	46	0.07	75	0.04	73	0.05
Moravec 1969		51	0.36	42	0.00	50	0.04	59	0.04	44	0.11	62	0.07
Morozova 2008		19	0.43	40	0.00	22	0.09	17	0.44	26	0.42	21	0.43
Neighaus 1950		31	0.41	30	0.00	34	0.07	30	0.28	23	0.37	28	0.32
Niedzielski 1931		58	0.35	29	0.00	56	0.04	62	0.04	47	0.05	74	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		5	0.49	3	0.02	7	0.13	6	0.62	6	0.54	5	0.58
Osinska 1989		2	0.53	22	0.00	3	0.14	3	0.69	10	0.62	4	0.65
Pachmann 1927		18	0.43	6	0.02	14	0.10	16	0.44	4	0.64	10	0.53
Paderewski 1930		76	0.30	14	0.01	43	0.06	44	0.12	14	0.56	33	0.26
Perlemuter 1992		22	0.42	35	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.12	16	0.47	35	0.24
Pierdomenico 2008		56	0.35	58	0.00	51	0.04	63	0.04	23	0.39	52	0.12
Poblocka 1999		13	0.45	27	0.00	20	0.10	21	0.39	27	0.43	22	0.41
Rabcewiczowa 1932		44	0.39	50	0.00	32	0.06	43	0.12	32	0.33	39	0.20
Rachmaninoff 1923		35	0.40	37	0.00	15	0.09	32	0.26	26	0.38	30	0.31
Rangell 2001		67	0.33	89	0.00	77	0.03	76	0.03	48	0.06	81	0.04
Richter 1976		4	0.51	34	0.00	6	0.19	4	0.66	11	0.66	3	0.66
Rosen 1989		3	0.51	8	0.02	5	0.15	8	0.56	6	0.57	9	0.56
Rosenthal 1930		47	0.38	55	0.00	57	0.04	64	0.04	15	0.60	47	0.15
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.26	79	0.00	81	0.03	75	0.03	32	0.39	54	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		85	0.26	90	0.00	86	0.05	57	0.05	35	0.29	53	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		29	0.41	31	0.00	26	0.06	25	0.34	6	0.66	18	0.47
Rosenthal 1931d		86	0.26	72	0.00	85	0.03	79	0.03	29	0.27	57	0.09
Rossi 2007		53	0.36	43	0.00	52	0.04	61	0.04	5	0.61	42	0.16
Rubinstein 1939		61	0.34	67	0.00	61	0.05	58	0.05	38	0.13	58	0.08
Rubinstein 1952		8	0.48	11	0.01	9	0.12	7	0.61	18	0.53	8	0.57
Rubinstein 1966		32	0.40	49	0.00	35	0.06	29	0.28	46	0.08	46	0.15
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.39	70	0.00	53	0.05	50	0.05	18	0.39	49	0.14
Shebanova 2002		6	0.49	13	0.01	8	0.12	5	0.63	17	0.52	7	0.57
Smith 1975		24	0.42	73	0.00	36	0.06	35	0.20	16	0.52	27	0.32
Sokolov 2002		42	0.39	51	0.00	58	0.05	55	0.05	34	0.30	51	0.12
Sztompka 1959		20	0.43	28	0.00	38	0.06	33	0.25	35	0.32	32	0.28
Tomsic 1995		72	0.32	45	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	71	0.04	85	0.03
Uninsky 1932		17	0.43	16	0.01	10	0.13	9	0.56	12	0.58	6	0.57
Uninsky 1971		28	0.42	4	0.02	17	0.09	18	0.41	28	0.35	25	0.38
Wasowski 1980		30	0.41	52	0.00	31	0.06	36	0.19	36	0.20	40	0.19
Zak 1937		65	0.33	46	0.00	66	0.03	71	0.03	45	0.08	70	0.05
Zak 1951		71	0.32	60	0.00	79	0.03	74	0.03	79	0.04	84	0.03
Random 1		90	-0.07	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	69	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		88	0.02	82	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	61	0.05	89	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.01	56	0.00	89	0.01	88	0.01	16	0.35	66	0.06

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).