Zak 1951

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		62	0.32	78	0.00	74	0.04	74	0.04	73	0.04	77	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		50	0.35	42	0.00	50	0.05	57	0.05	45	0.08	58	0.06
Ashkenazy 1981		18	0.43	12	0.00	25	0.07	34	0.20	46	0.10	36	0.14
Bacha 2000		59	0.32	31	0.00	70	0.04	66	0.04	49	0.06	61	0.05
Badura 1965		68	0.30	79	0.00	48	0.05	53	0.05	35	0.16	48	0.09
Barbosa 1983		5	0.47	28	0.00	7	0.13	7	0.62	16	0.48	8	0.55
Biret 1990		8	0.46	80	0.00	4	0.23	4	0.66	4	0.73	3	0.69
Blet 2003		33	0.39	81	0.00	28	0.06	25	0.30	13	0.50	18	0.39
Block 1995		34	0.39	32	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.19	44	0.12	34	0.15
Blumental 1952		36	0.38	22	0.00	55	0.06	46	0.06	47	0.07	59	0.06
Boshniakovich 1969		2	0.51	3	0.00	2	0.41	2	0.77	5	0.71	2	0.74
Brailowsky 1960		47	0.36	33	0.00	54	0.06	50	0.06	35	0.21	41	0.11
Bunin 1987		42	0.37	18	0.00	26	0.07	32	0.20	24	0.37	25	0.27
Bunin 1987b		46	0.37	58	0.00	27	0.06	37	0.19	19	0.42	23	0.28
Chiu 1999		9	0.46	59	0.00	17	0.10	16	0.44	19	0.38	14	0.41
Cohen 1997		80	0.24	82	0.00	80	0.04	65	0.04	57	0.04	78	0.04
Cortot 1951		86	0.18	60	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	82	0.02	88	0.02
Csalog 1996		13	0.44	17	0.00	11	0.21	11	0.51	5	0.54	10	0.52
Czerny 1949		75	0.27	2	0.00	72	0.03	84	0.03	57	0.05	76	0.04
Czerny 1990		67	0.31	61	0.00	73	0.04	68	0.04	52	0.06	68	0.05
Duchoud 2007		57	0.33	83	0.00	64	0.05	60	0.05	55	0.06	67	0.05
Ezaki 2006		38	0.38	43	0.00	46	0.06	49	0.06	53	0.07	56	0.06
Falvay 1989		7	0.47	6	0.00	13	0.12	10	0.52	30	0.31	16	0.40
Farrell 1958		54	0.33	62	0.00	24	0.10	29	0.24	27	0.31	24	0.27
Ferenczy 1958		70	0.30	34	0.00	76	0.04	72	0.04	34	0.38	39	0.12
Fliere 1977		20	0.42	44	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.19	73	0.04	47	0.09
Fou 1978		31	0.39	23	0.00	34	0.06	31	0.21	48	0.06	42	0.11
Francois 1956		76	0.26	29	0.00	68	0.04	75	0.04	52	0.05	81	0.04
Friedman 1923		26	0.41	19	0.00	22	0.11	19	0.43	11	0.62	11	0.52
Friedman 1923b		23	0.41	84	0.00	20	0.10	15	0.45	12	0.62	9	0.53
Friedman 1930		16	0.43	14	0.00	10	0.15	8	0.55	7	0.65	6	0.60
Garcia 2007		43	0.37	11	0.00	39	0.06	33	0.20	23	0.35	26	0.26
Garcia 2007b		55	0.33	45	0.00	49	0.04	63	0.04	40	0.13	55	0.07
Gierzod 1998		29	0.40	7	0.00	31	0.06	27	0.25	68	0.05	43	0.11
Gornostaeva 1994		61	0.32	35	0.00	41	0.05	44	0.11	55	0.05	54	0.07
Groot 1988		56	0.33	63	0.00	58	0.05	52	0.05	71	0.04	80	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		4	0.49	20	0.00	6	0.21	6	0.64	27	0.38	12	0.49
Hatto 1993		30	0.40	36	0.00	45	0.06	51	0.06	55	0.07	60	0.06
Hatto 1997		37	0.38	64	0.00	52	0.05	56	0.05	67	0.04	74	0.04
Horowitz 1949		66	0.31	9	0.00	62	0.04	70	0.04	50	0.06	65	0.05
Indjic 1988		21	0.42	8	0.00	36	0.05	30	0.21	46	0.09	35	0.14
Kapell 1951		12	0.44	65	0.00	8	0.13	20	0.43	20	0.35	17	0.39
Kissin 1993		48	0.36	37	0.00	59	0.04	67	0.04	52	0.07	66	0.05
Kushner 1989		14	0.44	21	0.00	14	0.10	14	0.48	61	0.05	32	0.15
Luisada 1991		15	0.44	38	0.00	19	0.09	22	0.41	25	0.30	20	0.35
Lushtak 2004		6	0.47	46	0.00	5	0.38	5	0.65	5	0.67	5	0.66
Malcuzynski 1961		24	0.41	15	0.00	21	0.11	18	0.43	45	0.08	28	0.19
Magaloff 1978		58	0.32	24	0.00	69	0.04	79	0.04	74	0.03	82	0.03
Magin 1975		19	0.42	47	0.00	15	0.10	13	0.48	19	0.46	13	0.47
Michalowski 1933		72	0.29	66	0.00	61	0.04	64	0.04	15	0.43	37	0.13
Milkina 1970		52	0.34	39	0.00	47	0.06	47	0.06	52	0.06	57	0.06
Mohovich 1999		11	0.45	67	0.00	12	0.16	21	0.41	28	0.42	15	0.41
Moravec 1969		69	0.30	48	0.00	75	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.02	85	0.02
Morozova 2008		71	0.29	85	0.00	63	0.04	73	0.04	66	0.04	73	0.04
Neighaus 1950		45	0.37	49	0.00	51	0.05	54	0.05	43	0.16	49	0.09
Niedzielski 1931		51	0.35	50	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.12	31	0.27	29	0.18
Ohlsson 1999		22	0.42	51	0.00	18	0.10	17	0.44	31	0.29	19	0.36
Osinska 1989		3	0.50	5	0.00	3	0.28	3	0.72	8	0.65	4	0.68
Pachmann 1927		39	0.38	68	0.00	43	0.05	42	0.12	17	0.47	27	0.24
Paderewski 1930		84	0.22	69	0.00	79	0.04	80	0.04	66	0.04	71	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		63	0.32	86	0.00	60	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.04	69	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		64	0.32	52	0.00	77	0.04	62	0.04	58	0.04	70	0.04
Poblocka 1999		32	0.39	87	0.00	42	0.05	41	0.13	48	0.07	44	0.10
Rabcewiczowa 1932		77	0.25	70	0.00	71	0.03	82	0.03	75	0.04	84	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		60	0.32	53	0.00	65	0.05	58	0.05	58	0.05	62	0.05
Rangell 2001		28	0.40	40	0.00	32	0.06	26	0.27	28	0.43	22	0.34
Richter 1976		41	0.37	54	0.00	57	0.08	45	0.08	47	0.07	52	0.07
Rosen 1989		25	0.41	55	0.00	29	0.06	23	0.37	44	0.08	30	0.17
Rosenthal 1930		87	0.17	88	0.00	87	0.03	87	0.03	86	0.02	86	0.02
Rosenthal 1931		85	0.19	56	0.00	85	0.04	69	0.04	44	0.14	53	0.07
Rosenthal 1931b		78	0.25	89	0.00	81	0.03	86	0.03	38	0.21	51	0.08
Rosenthal 1931c		82	0.23	4	0.00	84	0.03	85	0.03	81	0.02	89	0.02
Rosenthal 1931d		81	0.23	71	0.00	82	0.04	77	0.04	52	0.05	79	0.04
Rossi 2007		83	0.22	57	0.00	66	0.04	78	0.04	21	0.37	38	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		73	0.28	72	0.00	67	0.04	76	0.04	77	0.03	83	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		35	0.38	90	0.00	30	0.06	28	0.24	52	0.06	40	0.12
Rubinstein 1966		10	0.46	73	0.00	9	0.15	9	0.54	33	0.23	21	0.35
Schilhawsky 1960		17	0.43	16	0.00	16	0.11	12	0.49	3	0.65	7	0.56
Shebanova 2002		27	0.40	74	0.00	23	0.10	24	0.34	48	0.07	33	0.15
Smith 1975		74	0.27	25	0.00	78	0.05	59	0.05	59	0.05	63	0.05
Sokolov 2002		44	0.37	26	0.00	40	0.07	40	0.13	39	0.17	31	0.15
Sztompka 1959		79	0.24	75	0.00	83	0.05	61	0.05	87	0.03	72	0.04
Tomsic 1995		65	0.31	30	0.00	56	0.06	48	0.06	59	0.05	64	0.05
Uninsky 1932		53	0.34	76	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	84	0.03	75	0.04
Uninsky 1971		40	0.37	10	0.00	33	0.06	38	0.18	57	0.06	45	0.10
Wasowski 1980		49	0.35	13	0.00	35	0.07	39	0.15	57	0.05	46	0.09
Zak 1937		1	0.97	1	1.00	1	0.98	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Zak 1951		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Random 1		89	-0.04	77	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	61	0.03	87	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.05	41	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	81	0.02	90	0.01
Random 3		88	-0.02	27	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	17	0.34	50	0.08

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).