Smith 1975

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		15	0.42	30	0.00	23	0.10	23	0.45	21	0.47	16	0.46
Anderszewski 2003		38	0.36	40	0.00	32	0.08	32	0.31	44	0.14	27	0.21
Ashkenazy 1981		70	0.26	87	0.00	74	0.03	83	0.03	82	0.03	85	0.03
Bacha 2000		65	0.27	26	0.00	59	0.04	74	0.04	47	0.06	51	0.05
Badura 1965		72	0.26	62	0.00	73	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.03
Barbosa 1983		36	0.36	59	0.00	34	0.07	33	0.25	68	0.05	39	0.11
Biret 1990		5	0.47	6	0.04	4	0.19	8	0.61	14	0.60	6	0.60
Blet 2003		40	0.35	54	0.00	46	0.06	54	0.06	52	0.05	60	0.05
Block 1995		50	0.32	71	0.00	50	0.07	46	0.07	65	0.04	64	0.05
Blumental 1952		43	0.35	37	0.00	33	0.08	34	0.25	59	0.06	37	0.12
Boshniakovich 1969		45	0.34	16	0.00	30	0.10	29	0.36	49	0.06	33	0.15
Brailowsky 1960		13	0.43	9	0.02	14	0.13	14	0.55	13	0.64	7	0.59
Bunin 1987		84	0.14	83	0.00	85	0.02	85	0.02	80	0.03	90	0.02
Bunin 1987b		85	0.13	88	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	83	0.03	88	0.02
Chiu 1999		56	0.30	89	0.00	76	0.04	67	0.04	84	0.03	79	0.03
Cohen 1997		8	0.45	12	0.01	12	0.14	7	0.63	1	0.79	4	0.71
Cortot 1951		34	0.36	10	0.02	19	0.11	21	0.47	7	0.63	11	0.54
Csalog 1996		59	0.28	29	0.00	72	0.04	64	0.04	85	0.03	82	0.03
Czerny 1949		1	0.53	1	0.52	1	0.52	2	0.80	1	0.84	1	0.82
Czerny 1990		49	0.33	80	0.00	40	0.06	43	0.12	79	0.04	47	0.07
Duchoud 2007		78	0.23	28	0.00	80	0.04	71	0.04	66	0.05	75	0.04
Ezaki 2006		3	0.52	3	0.06	3	0.27	3	0.76	4	0.69	3	0.72
Falvay 1989		9	0.45	8	0.02	10	0.14	18	0.51	23	0.36	19	0.43
Farrell 1958		55	0.30	61	0.00	49	0.07	48	0.07	56	0.06	49	0.06
Ferenczy 1958		41	0.35	41	0.00	26	0.09	27	0.38	12	0.70	12	0.52
Fliere 1977		16	0.42	13	0.01	24	0.09	30	0.35	60	0.05	36	0.13
Fou 1978		44	0.35	17	0.00	41	0.05	44	0.12	64	0.04	44	0.07
Francois 1956		22	0.39	48	0.00	20	0.09	20	0.48	13	0.66	8	0.56
Friedman 1923		67	0.27	42	0.00	68	0.05	56	0.05	72	0.04	78	0.04
Friedman 1923b		66	0.27	67	0.00	66	0.04	70	0.04	70	0.04	76	0.04
Friedman 1930		53	0.31	68	0.00	62	0.05	58	0.05	55	0.05	62	0.05
Garcia 2007		86	0.12	43	0.00	84	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.03	83	0.03
Garcia 2007b		80	0.22	70	0.00	77	0.03	82	0.03	79	0.04	86	0.03
Gierzod 1998		24	0.39	27	0.00	8	0.13	9	0.61	27	0.32	17	0.44
Gornostaeva 1994		2	0.52	2	0.06	2	0.37	1	0.81	4	0.74	2	0.77
Groot 1988		21	0.40	20	0.00	22	0.11	22	0.47	54	0.05	34	0.15
Harasiewicz 1955		4	0.48	7	0.04	5	0.17	4	0.68	39	0.19	22	0.36
Hatto 1993		35	0.36	73	0.00	44	0.07	41	0.13	80	0.04	48	0.07
Hatto 1997		11	0.44	15	0.01	16	0.12	19	0.50	32	0.25	23	0.35
Horowitz 1949		83	0.19	90	0.00	83	0.03	80	0.03	78	0.03	81	0.03
Indjic 1988		42	0.35	81	0.00	45	0.07	47	0.07	72	0.04	59	0.05
Kapell 1951		76	0.24	77	0.00	79	0.04	68	0.04	77	0.04	67	0.04
Kissin 1993		58	0.28	69	0.00	60	0.05	62	0.05	72	0.05	58	0.05
Kushner 1989		32	0.36	45	0.00	39	0.05	38	0.18	55	0.06	40	0.10
Luisada 1991		26	0.38	33	0.00	36	0.05	39	0.16	50	0.07	38	0.11
Lushtak 2004		29	0.37	36	0.00	28	0.09	26	0.38	45	0.07	32	0.16
Malcuzynski 1961		64	0.27	66	0.00	63	0.05	60	0.05	74	0.04	69	0.04
Magaloff 1978		17	0.42	22	0.00	13	0.14	16	0.52	35	0.20	24	0.32
Magin 1975		14	0.43	31	0.00	18	0.16	13	0.58	29	0.36	15	0.46
Michalowski 1933		81	0.22	60	0.00	81	0.03	78	0.03	56	0.06	72	0.04
Milkina 1970		20	0.40	32	0.00	17	0.16	15	0.53	35	0.35	20	0.43
Mohovich 1999		46	0.34	82	0.00	47	0.06	49	0.06	72	0.04	65	0.05
Moravec 1969		33	0.36	23	0.00	27	0.09	24	0.42	47	0.07	29	0.17
Morozova 2008		61	0.28	64	0.00	70	0.03	76	0.03	87	0.02	89	0.02
Neighaus 1950		18	0.41	19	0.00	9	0.14	10	0.61	11	0.50	9	0.55
Niedzielski 1931		87	0.10	52	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	78	0.03	87	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		30	0.37	38	0.00	38	0.05	37	0.18	87	0.03	45	0.07
Osinska 1989		7	0.46	14	0.01	11	0.17	11	0.60	27	0.41	13	0.50
Pachmann 1927		79	0.23	75	0.00	82	0.04	73	0.04	61	0.05	71	0.04
Paderewski 1930		82	0.19	25	0.00	57	0.04	65	0.04	50	0.06	56	0.05
Perlemuter 1992		54	0.30	46	0.00	65	0.05	61	0.05	49	0.06	52	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		71	0.26	55	0.00	71	0.03	84	0.03	78	0.03	80	0.03
Poblocka 1999		25	0.38	47	0.00	43	0.06	40	0.14	55	0.06	42	0.09
Rabcewiczowa 1932		12	0.44	4	0.06	6	0.20	6	0.63	9	0.64	5	0.63
Rachmaninoff 1923		52	0.31	34	0.00	51	0.06	52	0.06	57	0.05	53	0.05
Rangell 2001		77	0.24	44	0.00	55	0.05	57	0.05	66	0.04	77	0.04
Richter 1976		48	0.33	50	0.00	61	0.04	72	0.04	52	0.06	55	0.05
Rosen 1989		23	0.39	56	0.00	37	0.05	36	0.19	55	0.05	41	0.10
Rosenthal 1930		31	0.37	21	0.00	29	0.10	31	0.32	19	0.58	21	0.43
Rosenthal 1931		62	0.28	63	0.00	54	0.08	45	0.08	27	0.44	28	0.19
Rosenthal 1931b		69	0.26	72	0.00	53	0.06	55	0.06	26	0.46	31	0.17
Rosenthal 1931c		39	0.36	18	0.00	25	0.10	25	0.41	13	0.56	14	0.48
Rosenthal 1931d		68	0.26	57	0.00	48	0.06	50	0.06	16	0.49	30	0.17
Rossi 2007		75	0.24	58	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	56	0.05	66	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		37	0.36	84	0.00	42	0.05	42	0.13	62	0.04	43	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		10	0.44	11	0.01	15	0.13	12	0.58	33	0.34	18	0.44
Rubinstein 1966		19	0.41	49	0.00	21	0.11	17	0.51	43	0.10	26	0.23
Schilhawsky 1960		47	0.33	24	0.00	64	0.06	51	0.06	76	0.04	61	0.05
Shebanova 2002		74	0.24	78	0.00	75	0.04	69	0.04	78	0.04	74	0.04
Smith 1975		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Sokolov 2002		28	0.37	76	0.00	35	0.07	35	0.21	31	0.36	25	0.27
Sztompka 1959		51	0.32	85	0.00	52	0.06	53	0.06	55	0.05	57	0.05
Tomsic 1995		57	0.29	39	0.00	56	0.04	63	0.04	63	0.05	70	0.04
Uninsky 1932		60	0.28	74	0.00	67	0.04	66	0.04	55	0.05	73	0.04
Uninsky 1971		6	0.46	5	0.05	7	0.13	5	0.67	22	0.43	10	0.54
Wasowski 1980		27	0.38	35	0.00	31	0.10	28	0.37	66	0.05	35	0.14
Zak 1937		73	0.25	79	0.00	69	0.04	75	0.04	81	0.04	68	0.04
Zak 1951		63	0.27	65	0.00	58	0.05	59	0.05	59	0.05	54	0.05
Random 1		90	0.00	51	0.00	89	0.01	88	0.01	16	0.42	50	0.06
Random 2		89	0.01	53	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	28	0.24	63	0.05
Random 3		88	0.01	86	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	4	0.53	46	0.07

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).