Ezaki 2006

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		13	0.47	14	0.01	16	0.07	21	0.53	6	0.63	15	0.58
Anderszewski 2003		36	0.40	27	0.00	23	0.08	33	0.41	29	0.41	31	0.41
Ashkenazy 1981		70	0.31	53	0.00	78	0.04	75	0.04	76	0.04	81	0.04
Bacha 2000		24	0.44	54	0.00	31	0.10	27	0.46	7	0.65	17	0.55
Badura 1965		45	0.38	40	0.00	46	0.09	47	0.09	17	0.45	45	0.20
Barbosa 1983		15	0.47	63	0.00	26	0.09	17	0.56	29	0.34	29	0.44
Biret 1990		40	0.39	29	0.00	28	0.10	42	0.25	29	0.39	37	0.31
Blet 2003		73	0.29	79	0.00	75	0.05	70	0.05	58	0.04	77	0.04
Block 1995		34	0.41	37	0.00	37	0.07	36	0.40	30	0.32	36	0.36
Blumental 1952		26	0.44	34	0.00	30	0.08	24	0.51	26	0.44	28	0.47
Boshniakovich 1969		63	0.33	61	0.00	51	0.06	58	0.06	66	0.05	72	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		8	0.49	3	0.06	10	0.13	11	0.60	7	0.72	7	0.66
Bunin 1987		65	0.33	80	0.00	63	0.05	66	0.05	36	0.20	52	0.10
Bunin 1987b		62	0.34	70	0.00	59	0.04	77	0.04	34	0.27	50	0.10
Chiu 1999		66	0.33	49	0.00	58	0.04	76	0.04	71	0.04	74	0.04
Cohen 1997		22	0.44	39	0.00	29	0.07	20	0.54	5	0.71	10	0.62
Cortot 1951		43	0.38	41	0.00	49	0.08	52	0.08	12	0.61	44	0.22
Csalog 1996		76	0.27	89	0.00	79	0.03	83	0.03	87	0.02	91	0.02
Czerny 1949		2	0.52	2	0.10	2	0.39	2	0.76	6	0.80	1	0.78
Czerny 1990		55	0.35	44	0.00	48	0.07	53	0.07	54	0.06	60	0.06
Duchoud 2007		83	0.20	77	0.00	81	0.04	79	0.04	76	0.04	80	0.04
Ezaki 2006		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Falvay 1989		9	0.48	10	0.01	17	0.07	10	0.61	13	0.44	21	0.52
Farrell 1958		39	0.39	20	0.00	45	0.12	43	0.24	25	0.35	40	0.29
Ferenczy 1958		21	0.45	19	0.00	32	0.11	28	0.45	4	0.77	14	0.59
Fliere 1977		28	0.43	60	0.00	34	0.07	30	0.42	54	0.06	48	0.16
Fou 1978		12	0.47	31	0.00	19	0.08	18	0.56	21	0.48	22	0.52
Francois 1956		56	0.35	48	0.00	42	0.09	45	0.17	19	0.54	39	0.30
Friedman 1923		82	0.20	90	0.00	84	0.04	72	0.04	89	0.02	88	0.03
Friedman 1923b		84	0.20	88	0.00	83	0.03	85	0.03	85	0.03	87	0.03
Friedman 1930		77	0.24	86	0.00	76	0.04	81	0.04	68	0.04	79	0.04
Garcia 2007		80	0.22	69	0.00	74	0.05	69	0.05	56	0.05	71	0.05
Garcia 2007b		78	0.23	57	0.00	77	0.04	74	0.04	53	0.05	83	0.04
Gierzod 1998		5	0.51	11	0.01	4	0.19	6	0.68	4	0.70	5	0.69
Gornostaeva 1994		11	0.47	30	0.00	15	0.10	12	0.60	9	0.64	11	0.62
Groot 1988		54	0.36	35	0.00	50	0.09	48	0.09	77	0.04	61	0.06
Harasiewicz 1955		14	0.47	47	0.00	20	0.08	15	0.58	37	0.23	34	0.37
Hatto 1993		48	0.37	55	0.00	55	0.05	61	0.05	69	0.04	82	0.04
Hatto 1997		27	0.43	23	0.00	35	0.07	40	0.33	35	0.23	41	0.28
Horowitz 1949		86	0.14	66	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	71	0.04	86	0.03
Indjic 1988		58	0.34	62	0.00	64	0.05	64	0.05	58	0.06	69	0.05
Kapell 1951		68	0.32	42	0.00	52	0.07	56	0.07	67	0.05	56	0.06
Kissin 1993		57	0.35	28	0.00	61	0.04	73	0.04	56	0.07	68	0.05
Kushner 1989		35	0.41	45	0.00	44	0.09	44	0.23	41	0.14	47	0.18
Luisada 1991		53	0.36	59	0.00	65	0.07	57	0.07	65	0.06	55	0.06
Lushtak 2004		33	0.41	67	0.00	39	0.10	35	0.40	27	0.32	35	0.36
Malcuzynski 1961		10	0.48	15	0.01	5	0.16	4	0.70	9	0.61	9	0.65
Magaloff 1978		30	0.42	33	0.00	41	0.12	39	0.34	32	0.27	38	0.30
Magin 1975		71	0.31	52	0.00	70	0.06	59	0.06	81	0.04	65	0.05
Michalowski 1933		87	0.12	81	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	82	0.03	90	0.02
Milkina 1970		31	0.42	32	0.00	22	0.08	29	0.42	29	0.43	30	0.42
Mohovich 1999		6	0.49	9	0.02	6	0.13	7	0.68	7	0.69	6	0.68
Moravec 1969		25	0.44	12	0.01	18	0.08	25	0.50	10	0.50	23	0.50
Morozova 2008		23	0.44	17	0.00	21	0.08	16	0.57	17	0.50	19	0.53
Neighaus 1950		60	0.34	84	0.00	66	0.07	55	0.07	47	0.06	62	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		85	0.18	74	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	68	0.04	85	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		41	0.39	43	0.00	38	0.09	37	0.37	42	0.14	42	0.23
Osinska 1989		19	0.46	7	0.03	8	0.12	22	0.52	25	0.46	25	0.49
Pachmann 1927		74	0.28	78	0.00	71	0.05	67	0.05	57	0.06	67	0.05
Paderewski 1930		88	0.09	68	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	79	0.03	89	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		75	0.28	36	0.00	72	0.06	60	0.06	67	0.05	64	0.05
Pierdomenico 2008		81	0.22	50	0.00	80	0.03	84	0.03	81	0.03	84	0.03
Poblocka 1999		20	0.45	18	0.00	25	0.08	31	0.42	31	0.35	33	0.38
Rabcewiczowa 1932		16	0.46	26	0.00	11	0.12	9	0.65	9	0.65	8	0.65
Rachmaninoff 1923		59	0.34	65	0.00	67	0.08	50	0.08	45	0.11	53	0.09
Rangell 2001		42	0.39	4	0.04	13	0.11	23	0.51	5	0.64	16	0.57
Richter 1976		49	0.37	73	0.00	56	0.05	63	0.05	74	0.04	75	0.04
Rosen 1989		18	0.46	25	0.00	14	0.11	13	0.58	15	0.43	24	0.50
Rosenthal 1930		37	0.40	46	0.00	36	0.07	32	0.41	11	0.69	20	0.53
Rosenthal 1931		32	0.42	6	0.03	12	0.12	26	0.49	9	0.75	13	0.61
Rosenthal 1931b		46	0.37	16	0.00	33	0.07	34	0.40	10	0.72	18	0.54
Rosenthal 1931c		29	0.42	22	0.00	27	0.10	19	0.55	6	0.71	12	0.62
Rosenthal 1931d		51	0.36	21	0.00	40	0.12	38	0.35	10	0.69	26	0.49
Rossi 2007		79	0.22	87	0.00	82	0.04	80	0.04	61	0.05	73	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		47	0.37	82	0.00	53	0.10	46	0.10	34	0.17	49	0.13
Rubinstein 1952		38	0.40	38	0.00	43	0.08	41	0.27	44	0.20	43	0.23
Rubinstein 1966		17	0.46	51	0.00	24	0.07	14	0.58	28	0.28	32	0.40
Schilhawsky 1960		69	0.32	85	0.00	73	0.04	71	0.04	69	0.04	78	0.04
Shebanova 2002		61	0.34	64	0.00	68	0.08	51	0.08	68	0.06	54	0.07
Smith 1975		3	0.52	8	0.02	9	0.12	5	0.69	4	0.76	2	0.72
Sokolov 2002		50	0.36	24	0.00	47	0.08	49	0.08	24	0.42	46	0.18
Sztompka 1959		67	0.32	56	0.00	62	0.05	62	0.05	79	0.04	76	0.04
Tomsic 1995		7	0.49	5	0.03	3	0.24	8	0.67	2	0.73	3	0.70
Uninsky 1932		64	0.33	71	0.00	60	0.04	78	0.04	46	0.06	70	0.05
Uninsky 1971		4	0.51	13	0.01	7	0.15	3	0.72	5	0.66	4	0.69
Wasowski 1980		72	0.30	83	0.00	69	0.05	65	0.05	66	0.05	63	0.05
Zak 1937		52	0.36	72	0.00	57	0.05	68	0.05	60	0.05	66	0.05
Zak 1951		44	0.38	58	0.00	54	0.07	54	0.07	50	0.06	57	0.06
Average		1	0.62	1	0.56	1	0.55	1	0.87	37	0.26	27	0.48
Random 1		90	0.00	75	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	19	0.38	58	0.06
Random 2		89	0.08	76	0.00	87	0.02	89	0.02	7	0.46	51	0.10
Random 3		91	-0.04	91	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	15	0.37	59	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).