Neighaus 1950

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		24	0.40	5	0.04	8	0.14	10	0.50	9	0.57	9	0.53
Anderszewski 2003		72	0.29	87	0.00	60	0.05	55	0.05	61	0.05	67	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		15	0.42	60	0.00	21	0.10	16	0.45	22	0.47	13	0.46
Bacha 2000		74	0.28	71	0.00	74	0.03	76	0.03	46	0.07	63	0.05
Badura 1965		81	0.24	56	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	80	0.03	87	0.03
Barbosa 1983		51	0.34	65	0.00	51	0.04	65	0.04	52	0.07	66	0.05
Biret 1990		34	0.37	28	0.00	35	0.07	36	0.23	33	0.35	28	0.28
Blet 2003		6	0.45	2	0.16	2	0.18	5	0.57	4	0.66	3	0.61
Block 1995		39	0.36	6	0.04	13	0.07	28	0.32	33	0.26	26	0.29
Blumental 1952		85	0.20	81	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	78	0.04	88	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		1	0.48	7	0.04	4	0.19	2	0.64	18	0.54	6	0.59
Brailowsky 1960		75	0.28	90	0.00	61	0.04	62	0.04	42	0.13	53	0.07
Bunin 1987		73	0.28	68	0.00	73	0.04	71	0.04	63	0.04	77	0.04
Bunin 1987b		78	0.27	66	0.00	78	0.04	69	0.04	81	0.03	81	0.03
Chiu 1999		45	0.35	25	0.00	49	0.04	63	0.04	73	0.04	70	0.04
Cohen 1997		49	0.34	29	0.00	27	0.07	38	0.20	30	0.47	24	0.31
Cortot 1951		54	0.33	24	0.00	24	0.09	33	0.25	16	0.51	21	0.36
Csalog 1996		66	0.31	73	0.00	71	0.03	74	0.03	70	0.04	83	0.03
Czerny 1949		23	0.40	59	0.00	32	0.08	29	0.31	22	0.57	16	0.42
Czerny 1990		50	0.34	39	0.00	47	0.05	58	0.05	66	0.04	78	0.04
Duchoud 2007		55	0.33	14	0.01	50	0.04	61	0.04	30	0.30	45	0.11
Ezaki 2006		53	0.34	72	0.00	57	0.06	46	0.06	54	0.07	56	0.06
Falvay 1989		68	0.30	76	0.00	75	0.04	64	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.04
Farrell 1958		42	0.36	88	0.00	53	0.05	52	0.05	43	0.13	50	0.08
Ferenczy 1958		84	0.22	44	0.00	76	0.03	78	0.03	43	0.19	52	0.08
Fliere 1977		25	0.40	26	0.00	26	0.07	22	0.39	59	0.05	35	0.14
Fou 1978		47	0.35	45	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	56	0.05	51	0.08
Francois 1956		12	0.43	11	0.02	9	0.12	8	0.53	7	0.72	2	0.62
Friedman 1923		9	0.44	21	0.00	5	0.22	3	0.61	13	0.60	4	0.60
Friedman 1923b		5	0.46	1	0.29	1	0.28	1	0.64	7	0.68	1	0.66
Friedman 1930		27	0.39	46	0.00	41	0.07	39	0.19	29	0.34	30	0.25
Garcia 2007		77	0.27	35	0.00	81	0.02	88	0.02	57	0.05	86	0.03
Garcia 2007b		80	0.26	57	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	58	0.05	79	0.04
Gierzod 1998		44	0.35	38	0.00	54	0.06	47	0.06	59	0.06	62	0.06
Gornostaeva 1994		16	0.42	23	0.00	23	0.10	19	0.42	22	0.48	14	0.45
Groot 1988		33	0.37	31	0.00	29	0.07	26	0.36	50	0.05	39	0.13
Harasiewicz 1955		4	0.47	4	0.04	7	0.16	6	0.54	38	0.19	23	0.32
Hatto 1993		26	0.39	30	0.00	16	0.07	24	0.37	36	0.18	29	0.26
Hatto 1997		41	0.36	53	0.00	37	0.07	37	0.20	52	0.05	46	0.10
Horowitz 1949		70	0.29	67	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	54	0.05	75	0.04
Indjic 1988		36	0.37	85	0.00	34	0.07	35	0.23	55	0.06	41	0.12
Kapell 1951		65	0.31	86	0.00	65	0.05	57	0.05	55	0.06	65	0.05
Kissin 1993		29	0.38	16	0.01	31	0.09	27	0.33	34	0.42	19	0.37
Kushner 1989		52	0.34	80	0.00	67	0.04	67	0.04	78	0.04	74	0.04
Luisada 1991		46	0.35	51	0.00	55	0.05	49	0.05	46	0.08	58	0.06
Lushtak 2004		37	0.37	47	0.00	42	0.07	41	0.18	41	0.08	43	0.12
Malcuzynski 1961		63	0.31	82	0.00	72	0.04	66	0.04	87	0.03	82	0.03
Magaloff 1978		20	0.41	41	0.00	28	0.08	23	0.37	30	0.28	22	0.32
Magin 1975		64	0.31	32	0.00	68	0.03	80	0.03	78	0.04	80	0.03
Michalowski 1933		71	0.29	27	0.00	69	0.03	73	0.03	40	0.17	55	0.07
Milkina 1970		57	0.32	17	0.01	46	0.05	50	0.05	46	0.08	60	0.06
Mohovich 1999		43	0.36	63	0.00	30	0.08	32	0.25	43	0.09	34	0.15
Moravec 1969		67	0.30	48	0.00	58	0.05	51	0.05	45	0.07	57	0.06
Morozova 2008		31	0.38	10	0.02	33	0.07	31	0.25	49	0.06	42	0.12
Neighaus 1950		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Niedzielski 1931		69	0.29	54	0.00	59	0.05	59	0.05	49	0.05	64	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		3	0.47	3	0.12	3	0.17	12	0.50	22	0.33	17	0.41
Osinska 1989		8	0.44	74	0.00	19	0.07	17	0.44	29	0.33	18	0.38
Pachmann 1927		40	0.36	43	0.00	40	0.06	40	0.19	23	0.43	25	0.29
Paderewski 1930		32	0.37	18	0.01	17	0.07	21	0.41	6	0.64	11	0.51
Perlemuter 1992		38	0.37	64	0.00	45	0.06	48	0.06	29	0.28	38	0.13
Pierdomenico 2008		48	0.34	19	0.01	66	0.04	70	0.04	41	0.13	54	0.07
Poblocka 1999		59	0.32	34	0.00	48	0.07	45	0.07	64	0.05	59	0.06
Rabcewiczowa 1932		19	0.41	15	0.01	14	0.09	13	0.49	15	0.56	10	0.52
Rachmaninoff 1923		79	0.26	77	0.00	62	0.05	53	0.05	74	0.03	71	0.04
Rangell 2001		14	0.43	9	0.03	10	0.10	7	0.53	10	0.55	8	0.54
Richter 1976		22	0.40	22	0.00	38	0.06	42	0.17	69	0.05	48	0.09
Rosen 1989		10	0.44	50	0.00	20	0.09	18	0.44	26	0.29	20	0.36
Rosenthal 1930		62	0.32	84	0.00	63	0.05	54	0.05	29	0.42	36	0.14
Rosenthal 1931		86	0.18	69	0.00	86	0.03	77	0.03	58	0.05	76	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.22	37	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	45	0.08	69	0.05
Rosenthal 1931c		58	0.32	52	0.00	52	0.05	60	0.05	24	0.38	37	0.14
Rosenthal 1931d		87	0.18	83	0.00	87	0.03	72	0.03	68	0.04	89	0.03
Rossi 2007		82	0.22	61	0.00	84	0.03	83	0.03	40	0.20	49	0.08
Rubinstein 1939		61	0.32	78	0.00	56	0.05	56	0.05	58	0.04	73	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		30	0.38	79	0.00	36	0.08	30	0.29	53	0.06	40	0.13
Rubinstein 1966		17	0.42	36	0.00	15	0.08	14	0.48	64	0.06	31	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		76	0.28	33	0.00	82	0.03	86	0.03	66	0.04	84	0.03
Shebanova 2002		11	0.43	75	0.00	22	0.11	20	0.42	53	0.07	32	0.17
Smith 1975		18	0.41	42	0.00	12	0.11	11	0.50	10	0.61	7	0.55
Sokolov 2002		13	0.43	13	0.02	18	0.07	15	0.46	11	0.52	12	0.49
Sztompka 1959		2	0.47	8	0.03	6	0.18	4	0.60	15	0.58	5	0.59
Tomsic 1995		56	0.32	49	0.00	64	0.04	68	0.04	48	0.08	61	0.06
Uninsky 1932		60	0.32	55	0.00	70	0.03	75	0.03	70	0.04	85	0.03
Uninsky 1971		21	0.41	58	0.00	25	0.07	25	0.37	37	0.21	27	0.28
Wasowski 1980		7	0.45	12	0.02	11	0.13	9	0.51	32	0.36	15	0.43
Zak 1937		28	0.39	20	0.01	39	0.06	34	0.24	44	0.10	33	0.15
Zak 1951		35	0.37	40	0.00	43	0.08	43	0.16	54	0.05	47	0.09
Random 1		88	0.02	70	0.00	88	0.03	84	0.03	8	0.47	44	0.12
Random 2		89	-0.05	89	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	79	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3		90	-0.05	62	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	40	0.14	68	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).