Hatto 1993

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		50	0.38	4	0.00	49	0.07	54	0.07	15	0.51	48	0.19
Anderszewski 2003		36	0.42	46	0.00	41	0.06	39	0.17	20	0.52	36	0.30
Ashkenazy 1981		9	0.51	11	0.00	13	0.12	9	0.62	6	0.69	9	0.65
Bacha 2000		39	0.41	12	0.00	42	0.07	35	0.20	10	0.59	33	0.34
Badura 1965		69	0.34	61	0.00	68	0.04	73	0.04	48	0.05	84	0.04
Barbosa 1983		16	0.49	10	0.00	15	0.12	12	0.61	7	0.67	11	0.64
Biret 1990		53	0.37	30	0.00	64	0.05	62	0.05	42	0.20	65	0.10
Blet 2003		31	0.43	77	0.00	21	0.09	27	0.35	11	0.53	26	0.43
Block 1995		59	0.37	47	0.00	48	0.07	57	0.07	41	0.16	60	0.11
Blumental 1952		8	0.52	22	0.00	9	0.13	7	0.71	2	0.79	4	0.75
Boshniakovich 1969		51	0.38	48	0.00	45	0.09	40	0.17	46	0.08	58	0.12
Brailowsky 1960		78	0.28	31	0.00	87	0.05	65	0.05	50	0.07	74	0.06
Bunin 1987		52	0.37	23	0.00	32	0.07	41	0.17	12	0.53	37	0.30
Bunin 1987b		54	0.37	32	0.00	34	0.06	44	0.14	14	0.50	40	0.26
Chiu 1999		19	0.47	78	0.00	28	0.11	22	0.41	9	0.55	21	0.47
Cohen 1997		79	0.28	79	0.00	78	0.04	75	0.04	46	0.09	77	0.06
Cortot 1951		85	0.26	62	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	51	0.07	80	0.05
Csalog 1996		66	0.35	16	0.00	70	0.05	66	0.05	47	0.08	76	0.06
Czerny 1949		72	0.31	49	0.00	75	0.04	77	0.04	41	0.22	67	0.09
Czerny 1990		6	0.53	63	0.00	5	0.20	5	0.74	8	0.77	5	0.75
Duchoud 2007		57	0.37	50	0.00	57	0.07	53	0.07	21	0.40	51	0.17
Ezaki 2006		56	0.37	7	0.00	69	0.04	69	0.04	61	0.05	82	0.04
Falvay 1989		21	0.47	33	0.00	31	0.08	28	0.31	20	0.40	30	0.35
Farrell 1958		75	0.29	64	0.00	77	0.04	79	0.04	55	0.06	79	0.05
Ferenczy 1958		82	0.27	13	0.00	83	0.03	82	0.03	42	0.23	71	0.08
Fliere 1977		12	0.50	9	0.00	18	0.14	14	0.57	23	0.47	18	0.52
Fou 1978		29	0.43	65	0.00	40	0.06	45	0.12	34	0.30	47	0.19
Francois 1956		81	0.27	27	0.00	79	0.05	63	0.05	45	0.10	73	0.07
Friedman 1923		62	0.36	80	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	27	0.41	57	0.13
Friedman 1923b		64	0.35	34	0.00	62	0.05	60	0.05	29	0.40	56	0.14
Friedman 1930		30	0.43	15	0.00	33	0.07	31	0.27	16	0.56	29	0.39
Garcia 2007		70	0.34	35	0.00	53	0.07	50	0.07	18	0.42	52	0.17
Garcia 2007b		28	0.43	81	0.00	12	0.11	17	0.54	5	0.74	12	0.63
Gierzod 1998		34	0.42	66	0.00	35	0.06	30	0.28	20	0.44	32	0.35
Gornostaeva 1994		73	0.31	36	0.00	80	0.03	84	0.03	58	0.05	86	0.04
Groot 1988		5	0.53	67	0.00	6	0.28	6	0.74	3	0.76	6	0.75
Harasiewicz 1955		7	0.53	37	0.00	10	0.14	11	0.61	11	0.58	14	0.59
Hatto 1993		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Hatto 1997		2	0.88	2	0.00	2	0.94	2	0.98	2	0.98	2	0.98
Horowitz 1949		65	0.35	51	0.00	56	0.06	59	0.06	16	0.55	50	0.18
Indjic 1988		1	0.97	1	0.99	1	0.98	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Kapell 1951		15	0.49	17	0.00	16	0.13	13	0.59	9	0.53	15	0.56
Kissin 1993		20	0.47	68	0.00	23	0.08	18	0.49	18	0.61	16	0.55
Kushner 1989		18	0.48	38	0.00	20	0.11	21	0.44	25	0.38	28	0.41
Luisada 1991		11	0.50	5	0.00	7	0.19	10	0.62	7	0.67	10	0.64
Lushtak 2004		67	0.35	28	0.00	60	0.04	70	0.04	67	0.04	85	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		24	0.44	6	0.00	19	0.10	20	0.46	15	0.52	20	0.49
Magaloff 1978		45	0.40	39	0.00	43	0.07	36	0.18	29	0.28	42	0.22
Magin 1975		10	0.51	69	0.00	11	0.11	8	0.66	3	0.75	8	0.70
Michalowski 1933		77	0.29	70	0.00	76	0.04	68	0.04	32	0.27	61	0.10
Milkina 1970		14	0.49	71	0.00	14	0.13	16	0.54	13	0.66	13	0.60
Mohovich 1999		40	0.41	72	0.00	17	0.12	25	0.40	24	0.48	25	0.44
Moravec 1969		26	0.44	20	0.00	39	0.05	43	0.15	16	0.44	39	0.26
Morozova 2008		43	0.40	52	0.00	37	0.06	42	0.16	34	0.30	44	0.22
Neighaus 1950		47	0.39	82	0.00	36	0.05	37	0.18	25	0.37	41	0.26
Niedzielski 1931		44	0.40	14	0.00	27	0.10	32	0.27	4	0.61	27	0.41
Ohlsson 1999		22	0.46	53	0.00	25	0.09	29	0.31	21	0.36	34	0.33
Osinska 1989		37	0.41	83	0.00	54	0.07	51	0.07	41	0.17	59	0.11
Pachmann 1927		83	0.27	29	0.00	82	0.03	83	0.03	55	0.06	83	0.04
Paderewski 1930		68	0.34	40	0.00	50	0.07	55	0.07	5	0.66	45	0.21
Perlemuter 1992		74	0.31	84	0.00	66	0.04	80	0.04	38	0.18	69	0.08
Pierdomenico 2008		55	0.37	21	0.00	51	0.08	48	0.08	7	0.58	43	0.22
Poblocka 1999		48	0.39	54	0.00	52	0.09	46	0.09	33	0.30	53	0.16
Rabcewiczowa 1932		76	0.29	85	0.00	73	0.04	78	0.04	53	0.06	78	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923		58	0.37	73	0.00	58	0.08	49	0.08	34	0.26	55	0.14
Rangell 2001		80	0.27	41	0.00	74	0.04	72	0.04	71	0.03	88	0.03
Richter 1976		23	0.45	24	0.00	30	0.08	33	0.25	23	0.50	31	0.35
Rosen 1989		35	0.42	74	0.00	47	0.07	58	0.07	41	0.15	64	0.10
Rosenthal 1930		60	0.37	25	0.00	59	0.05	64	0.05	29	0.43	54	0.15
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.27	86	0.00	81	0.04	74	0.04	40	0.23	62	0.10
Rosenthal 1931b		86	0.25	75	0.00	85	0.02	88	0.02	45	0.11	81	0.05
Rosenthal 1931c		71	0.34	42	0.00	72	0.04	71	0.04	31	0.25	66	0.10
Rosenthal 1931d		87	0.23	87	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	50	0.05	87	0.04
Rossi 2007		88	0.08	88	0.00	88	0.02	89	0.02	81	0.02	89	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		33	0.42	18	0.00	38	0.06	34	0.20	16	0.47	35	0.31
Rubinstein 1952		27	0.43	89	0.00	29	0.07	24	0.40	16	0.55	23	0.47
Rubinstein 1966		13	0.50	43	0.00	8	0.16	15	0.54	16	0.55	17	0.54
Schilhawsky 1960		63	0.35	90	0.00	67	0.04	76	0.04	32	0.25	63	0.10
Shebanova 2002		4	0.55	19	0.00	4	0.44	4	0.75	6	0.70	7	0.72
Smith 1975		61	0.36	55	0.00	71	0.04	81	0.04	42	0.13	72	0.07
Sokolov 2002		32	0.42	56	0.00	55	0.07	52	0.07	17	0.48	49	0.18
Sztompka 1959		41	0.41	44	0.00	24	0.11	26	0.38	17	0.56	24	0.46
Tomsic 1995		38	0.41	57	0.00	46	0.08	47	0.08	12	0.48	46	0.20
Uninsky 1932		49	0.38	26	0.00	44	0.07	38	0.17	20	0.46	38	0.28
Uninsky 1971		25	0.44	58	0.00	26	0.09	23	0.40	11	0.55	22	0.47
Wasowski 1980		17	0.48	59	0.00	22	0.13	19	0.48	20	0.50	19	0.49
Zak 1937		42	0.40	8	0.00	63	0.05	61	0.05	44	0.12	70	0.08
Zak 1951		46	0.40	45	0.00	65	0.07	56	0.07	52	0.05	75	0.06
Average		3	0.69	3	0.00	3	0.74	3	0.91	5	0.65	3	0.77
Random 1		90	-0.03	76	0.00	90	0.02	90	0.02	63	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		89	0.06	91	0.00	89	0.03	87	0.03	26	0.28	68	0.09
Random 3		91	-0.08	60	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	86	0.02	91	0.01

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).