Rubinstein 1939

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		51	0.33	27	0.00	55	0.05	52	0.05	57	0.05	64	0.05
Anderszewski 2003		11	0.44	25	0.00	13	0.13	10	0.55	14	0.59	7	0.57
Ashkenazy 1981		35	0.35	57	0.00	51	0.05	50	0.05	51	0.07	57	0.06
Bacha 2000		44	0.34	45	0.00	37	0.05	34	0.16	17	0.47	27	0.27
Badura 1965		65	0.30	47	0.00	56	0.05	48	0.05	46	0.07	55	0.06
Barbosa 1983		20	0.40	40	0.00	30	0.07	30	0.22	55	0.06	42	0.11
Biret 1990		13	0.43	37	0.00	19	0.10	17	0.46	13	0.61	10	0.53
Blet 2003		82	0.22	16	0.00	87	0.03	73	0.03	83	0.03	83	0.03
Block 1995		67	0.28	88	0.00	61	0.04	66	0.04	69	0.04	73	0.04
Blumental 1952		27	0.37	21	0.00	33	0.06	31	0.21	42	0.14	33	0.17
Boshniakovich 1969		76	0.24	75	0.00	66	0.04	64	0.04	80	0.04	74	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		31	0.36	41	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.09	34	0.22	37	0.14
Bunin 1987		54	0.33	50	0.00	63	0.04	61	0.04	47	0.07	65	0.05
Bunin 1987b		61	0.31	33	0.00	64	0.05	47	0.05	55	0.05	59	0.05
Chiu 1999		39	0.35	44	0.00	62	0.04	60	0.04	60	0.05	67	0.04
Cohen 1997		47	0.34	32	0.00	53	0.05	51	0.05	25	0.49	34	0.16
Cortot 1951		42	0.34	62	0.00	28	0.08	29	0.23	13	0.57	20	0.36
Csalog 1996		36	0.35	35	0.00	50	0.05	46	0.05	38	0.13	48	0.08
Czerny 1949		3	0.52	5	0.04	4	0.50	3	0.72	2	0.84	2	0.78
Czerny 1990		22	0.39	6	0.02	6	0.14	19	0.45	33	0.41	16	0.43
Duchoud 2007		37	0.35	43	0.00	41	0.05	39	0.11	19	0.42	30	0.21
Ezaki 2006		28	0.37	89	0.00	36	0.05	33	0.17	45	0.10	39	0.13
Falvay 1989		9	0.45	8	0.01	7	0.11	11	0.54	10	0.46	12	0.50
Farrell 1958		10	0.44	17	0.00	10	0.18	5	0.60	2	0.67	5	0.63
Ferenczy 1958		73	0.26	48	0.00	76	0.03	72	0.03	54	0.06	72	0.04
Fliere 1977		33	0.36	74	0.00	34	0.06	35	0.15	72	0.04	46	0.08
Fou 1978		16	0.42	31	0.00	12	0.17	13	0.52	23	0.43	13	0.47
Francois 1956		60	0.32	52	0.00	59	0.04	59	0.04	24	0.38	41	0.12
Friedman 1923		78	0.23	90	0.00	82	0.03	76	0.03	73	0.04	89	0.03
Friedman 1923b		80	0.23	72	0.00	81	0.02	88	0.02	56	0.05	88	0.03
Friedman 1930		85	0.20	9	0.01	83	0.02	84	0.02	73	0.04	84	0.03
Garcia 2007		86	0.20	87	0.00	74	0.03	82	0.03	68	0.04	86	0.03
Garcia 2007b		72	0.26	36	0.00	60	0.04	68	0.04	71	0.04	77	0.04
Gierzod 1998		45	0.34	55	0.00	39	0.05	36	0.15	46	0.08	43	0.11
Gornostaeva 1994		18	0.42	38	0.00	17	0.10	20	0.42	20	0.51	14	0.46
Groot 1988		52	0.33	12	0.01	32	0.05	32	0.18	64	0.04	49	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		7	0.46	10	0.01	11	0.23	7	0.59	29	0.35	15	0.45
Hatto 1993		17	0.42	18	0.00	20	0.10	15	0.47	33	0.20	22	0.31
Hatto 1997		5	0.47	4	0.06	5	0.28	6	0.60	11	0.56	6	0.58
Horowitz 1949		79	0.23	28	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	64	0.04	82	0.03
Indjic 1988		19	0.42	76	0.00	21	0.12	16	0.46	33	0.28	18	0.36
Kapell 1951		21	0.39	29	0.00	16	0.11	21	0.41	35	0.21	24	0.29
Kissin 1993		55	0.33	65	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.15	39	0.28	31	0.20
Kushner 1989		14	0.43	20	0.00	8	0.14	12	0.52	34	0.26	17	0.37
Luisada 1991		50	0.33	61	0.00	68	0.05	49	0.05	63	0.06	58	0.05
Lushtak 2004		57	0.32	73	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.08	50	0.05	56	0.06
Malcuzynski 1961		24	0.38	49	0.00	22	0.11	18	0.46	38	0.20	23	0.30
Magaloff 1978		46	0.34	68	0.00	35	0.05	38	0.13	58	0.05	47	0.08
Magin 1975		40	0.35	77	0.00	48	0.04	65	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.04
Michalowski 1933		83	0.21	56	0.00	75	0.03	79	0.03	57	0.06	71	0.04
Milkina 1970		1	0.55	1	0.31	1	0.30	1	0.78	2	0.80	1	0.79
Mohovich 1999		49	0.33	81	0.00	45	0.04	63	0.04	49	0.05	75	0.04
Moravec 1969		8	0.45	11	0.01	14	0.15	9	0.56	7	0.54	9	0.55
Morozova 2008		6	0.47	15	0.00	9	0.14	8	0.58	7	0.56	8	0.57
Neighaus 1950		58	0.32	83	0.00	52	0.04	58	0.04	56	0.05	76	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.25	63	0.00	70	0.03	71	0.03	68	0.04	80	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		15	0.43	7	0.01	23	0.10	22	0.39	28	0.30	21	0.34
Osinska 1989		25	0.38	70	0.00	26	0.07	23	0.38	47	0.06	35	0.15
Pachmann 1927		74	0.25	64	0.00	77	0.03	74	0.03	53	0.07	62	0.05
Paderewski 1930		84	0.20	86	0.00	84	0.03	81	0.03	58	0.05	70	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		77	0.24	60	0.00	86	0.03	78	0.03	85	0.03	78	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		81	0.23	53	0.00	79	0.03	80	0.03	57	0.04	79	0.03
Poblocka 1999		48	0.34	58	0.00	58	0.04	69	0.04	59	0.05	66	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		23	0.39	42	0.00	15	0.11	14	0.49	18	0.54	11	0.51
Rachmaninoff 1923		32	0.36	23	0.00	25	0.08	28	0.24	34	0.25	28	0.24
Rangell 2001		41	0.35	78	0.00	27	0.08	26	0.29	27	0.45	19	0.36
Richter 1976		30	0.36	69	0.00	49	0.05	54	0.05	55	0.06	61	0.05
Rosen 1989		56	0.32	30	0.00	67	0.04	56	0.04	82	0.03	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		62	0.31	54	0.00	31	0.06	40	0.10	39	0.24	36	0.15
Rosenthal 1931		59	0.32	19	0.00	57	0.04	67	0.04	30	0.40	40	0.13
Rosenthal 1931b		70	0.27	46	0.00	71	0.03	70	0.03	42	0.15	52	0.07
Rosenthal 1931c		53	0.33	13	0.01	54	0.04	55	0.04	35	0.21	45	0.09
Rosenthal 1931d		69	0.28	34	0.00	69	0.06	45	0.06	23	0.34	38	0.14
Rossi 2007		87	0.18	79	0.00	80	0.02	85	0.02	43	0.16	53	0.06
Rubinstein 1939		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rubinstein 1952		4	0.51	2	0.24	2	0.28	4	0.67	4	0.69	4	0.68
Rubinstein 1966		2	0.54	3	0.20	3	0.39	2	0.76	9	0.68	3	0.72
Schilhawsky 1960		66	0.28	26	0.00	73	0.03	75	0.03	43	0.10	63	0.05
Shebanova 2002		64	0.30	67	0.00	65	0.05	53	0.05	52	0.07	54	0.06
Smith 1975		29	0.36	80	0.00	47	0.04	62	0.04	42	0.13	50	0.07
Sokolov 2002		43	0.34	66	0.00	40	0.04	41	0.10	32	0.34	32	0.18
Sztompka 1959		38	0.35	24	0.00	43	0.04	43	0.08	50	0.06	51	0.07
Tomsic 1995		63	0.31	84	0.00	46	0.04	57	0.04	50	0.07	60	0.05
Uninsky 1932		34	0.35	14	0.00	18	0.08	25	0.30	30	0.26	26	0.28
Uninsky 1971		12	0.43	22	0.00	24	0.14	24	0.37	35	0.23	25	0.29
Wasowski 1980		26	0.37	59	0.00	29	0.07	27	0.26	37	0.18	29	0.22
Zak 1937		71	0.26	39	0.00	78	0.03	83	0.03	64	0.05	69	0.04
Zak 1951		68	0.28	51	0.00	72	0.03	77	0.03	76	0.04	81	0.03
Random 1		88	0.04	71	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	9	0.47	44	0.10
Random 2		89	0.02	82	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	50	0.05	85	0.03
Random 3		90	-0.07	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	66	0.03	90	0.02

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).