Garcia 2007

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		78	0.20	36	0.00	65	0.03	83	0.03	62	0.04	82	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		44	0.30	51	0.00	22	0.06	20	0.41	42	0.21	13	0.29
Ashkenazy 1981		54	0.27	70	0.00	59	0.05	59	0.05	72	0.05	57	0.05
Bacha 2000		68	0.23	65	0.00	76	0.05	66	0.05	66	0.04	61	0.04
Badura 1965		73	0.21	58	0.00	71	0.05	64	0.05	83	0.03	69	0.04
Barbosa 1983		19	0.34	20	0.00	13	0.09	14	0.53	47	0.09	24	0.22
Biret 1990		69	0.23	61	0.00	73	0.05	50	0.05	66	0.04	71	0.04
Blet 2003		60	0.26	37	0.00	64	0.03	81	0.03	73	0.03	80	0.03
Block 1995		18	0.36	6	0.01	14	0.08	21	0.40	44	0.12	26	0.22
Blumental 1952		56	0.27	11	0.01	53	0.04	72	0.04	63	0.05	70	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		3	0.46	2	0.09	3	0.39	3	0.76	16	0.55	3	0.65
Brailowsky 1960		75	0.21	64	0.00	82	0.04	76	0.04	79	0.04	62	0.04
Bunin 1987		34	0.31	77	0.00	40	0.05	38	0.16	53	0.06	39	0.10
Bunin 1987b		30	0.32	74	0.00	41	0.05	37	0.16	45	0.13	32	0.14
Chiu 1999		35	0.31	43	0.00	31	0.08	29	0.30	58	0.05	35	0.12
Cohen 1997		61	0.26	23	0.00	45	0.05	44	0.10	52	0.06	42	0.08
Cortot 1951		74	0.21	78	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	61	0.06	72	0.04
Csalog 1996		29	0.32	19	0.00	30	0.08	30	0.30	40	0.12	27	0.19
Czerny 1949		86	0.16	79	0.00	78	0.04	77	0.04	67	0.04	68	0.04
Czerny 1990		36	0.31	81	0.00	44	0.04	45	0.09	70	0.04	48	0.06
Duchoud 2007		47	0.29	47	0.00	54	0.05	54	0.05	50	0.06	55	0.05
Ezaki 2006		72	0.22	53	0.00	72	0.05	56	0.05	69	0.05	49	0.05
Falvay 1989		46	0.29	49	0.00	34	0.10	34	0.21	62	0.05	37	0.10
Farrell 1958		63	0.25	54	0.00	52	0.05	67	0.05	58	0.06	51	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		83	0.17	85	0.00	84	0.02	88	0.02	67	0.04	81	0.03
Fliere 1977		6	0.43	16	0.00	5	0.19	4	0.69	44	0.17	12	0.34
Fou 1978		33	0.31	25	0.00	43	0.04	43	0.10	63	0.04	47	0.06
Francois 1956		80	0.19	80	0.00	81	0.05	57	0.05	76	0.03	73	0.04
Friedman 1923		51	0.29	27	0.00	56	0.05	55	0.05	58	0.05	60	0.05
Friedman 1923b		52	0.28	68	0.00	61	0.05	52	0.05	50	0.06	58	0.05
Friedman 1930		24	0.33	10	0.01	32	0.09	32	0.24	57	0.05	36	0.11
Garcia 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Garcia 2007b		1	0.55	1	0.72	1	0.71	1	0.88	1	0.87	1	0.87
Gierzod 1998		43	0.30	14	0.00	23	0.08	25	0.35	58	0.06	34	0.14
Gornostaeva 1994		41	0.30	46	0.00	48	0.05	61	0.05	43	0.09	45	0.07
Groot 1988		39	0.30	59	0.00	36	0.07	36	0.17	68	0.04	43	0.08
Harasiewicz 1955		12	0.38	7	0.01	8	0.15	11	0.57	44	0.12	20	0.26
Hatto 1993		22	0.34	17	0.00	28	0.08	18	0.42	50	0.07	29	0.17
Hatto 1997		58	0.27	50	0.00	39	0.06	42	0.10	50	0.05	44	0.07
Horowitz 1949		50	0.29	38	0.00	60	0.05	51	0.05	57	0.05	52	0.05
Indjic 1988		25	0.33	55	0.00	27	0.07	19	0.41	69	0.05	33	0.14
Kapell 1951		5	0.43	8	0.01	10	0.18	10	0.59	27	0.31	7	0.43
Kissin 1993		62	0.25	67	0.00	68	0.04	78	0.04	51	0.07	53	0.05
Kushner 1989		13	0.37	29	0.00	6	0.17	9	0.61	34	0.29	9	0.42
Luisada 1991		49	0.29	87	0.00	62	0.07	47	0.07	60	0.06	46	0.06
Lushtak 2004		48	0.29	73	0.00	55	0.06	48	0.06	55	0.05	56	0.05
Malcuzynski 1961		14	0.37	28	0.00	9	0.16	8	0.63	32	0.33	6	0.46
Magaloff 1978		53	0.28	66	0.00	51	0.04	70	0.04	79	0.03	75	0.03
Magin 1975		55	0.27	71	0.00	57	0.05	53	0.05	77	0.04	64	0.04
Michalowski 1933		70	0.23	35	0.00	75	0.04	73	0.04	70	0.05	66	0.04
Milkina 1970		71	0.23	33	0.00	35	0.07	40	0.14	55	0.05	41	0.08
Mohovich 1999		4	0.44	5	0.02	4	0.36	5	0.68	16	0.58	4	0.63
Moravec 1969		40	0.30	22	0.00	63	0.04	68	0.04	75	0.03	74	0.03
Morozova 2008		37	0.30	24	0.00	18	0.09	22	0.39	42	0.17	18	0.26
Neighaus 1950		57	0.27	13	0.00	74	0.05	58	0.05	89	0.02	85	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		45	0.29	12	0.01	33	0.10	33	0.21	37	0.24	22	0.22
Ohlsson 1999		65	0.25	90	0.00	47	0.05	60	0.05	71	0.04	65	0.04
Osinska 1989		20	0.34	62	0.00	26	0.07	23	0.38	60	0.05	31	0.14
Pachmann 1927		26	0.33	40	0.00	37	0.05	35	0.18	27	0.37	17	0.26
Paderewski 1930		23	0.33	18	0.00	29	0.09	28	0.31	16	0.55	10	0.41
Perlemuter 1992		27	0.33	48	0.00	21	0.07	31	0.26	33	0.24	21	0.25
Pierdomenico 2008		7	0.42	9	0.01	7	0.16	6	0.65	4	0.69	2	0.67
Poblocka 1999		38	0.30	34	0.00	42	0.05	41	0.12	68	0.05	40	0.08
Rabcewiczowa 1932		31	0.31	45	0.00	38	0.05	39	0.16	58	0.06	38	0.10
Rachmaninoff 1923		67	0.24	86	0.00	66	0.03	79	0.03	76	0.03	76	0.03
Rangell 2001		8	0.42	26	0.00	12	0.14	12	0.56	12	0.55	5	0.55
Richter 1976		11	0.38	56	0.00	16	0.12	13	0.55	32	0.34	8	0.43
Rosen 1989		10	0.39	4	0.02	15	0.10	16	0.47	42	0.14	19	0.26
Rosenthal 1930		82	0.18	60	0.00	88	0.03	84	0.03	85	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		88	0.11	82	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	81	0.03	88	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		85	0.17	89	0.00	83	0.02	87	0.02	66	0.04	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		76	0.20	44	0.00	79	0.04	74	0.04	79	0.03	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		81	0.18	88	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	71	0.04	84	0.03
Rossi 2007		64	0.25	52	0.00	46	0.05	65	0.05	8	0.59	28	0.17
Rubinstein 1939		79	0.20	72	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	83	0.03	78	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		59	0.27	57	0.00	58	0.07	46	0.07	76	0.03	59	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		9	0.41	30	0.00	11	0.17	7	0.64	40	0.13	14	0.29
Schilhawsky 1960		66	0.24	41	0.00	70	0.04	71	0.04	54	0.05	67	0.04
Shebanova 2002		17	0.36	21	0.00	17	0.10	15	0.49	44	0.16	15	0.28
Smith 1975		87	0.12	42	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	82	0.03	77	0.03
Sokolov 2002		84	0.17	63	0.00	67	0.04	75	0.04	68	0.04	63	0.04
Sztompka 1959		28	0.32	69	0.00	20	0.08	26	0.33	49	0.07	30	0.15
Tomsic 1995		21	0.34	39	0.00	19	0.10	17	0.46	26	0.30	11	0.37
Uninsky 1932		32	0.31	91	0.00	49	0.06	49	0.06	60	0.05	54	0.05
Uninsky 1971		77	0.20	83	0.00	77	0.05	63	0.05	88	0.02	79	0.03
Wasowski 1980		42	0.30	32	0.00	50	0.05	62	0.05	69	0.05	50	0.05
Zak 1937		15	0.37	31	0.00	25	0.09	27	0.33	43	0.15	23	0.22
Zak 1951		16	0.37	15	0.00	24	0.07	24	0.35	34	0.20	16	0.26
Average		2	0.51	3	0.04	2	0.39	2	0.83	56	0.06	25	0.22
Random 1		91	-0.07	75	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	49	0.05	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.02	84	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	69	0.03	89	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.05	76	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	64	0.03	91	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).