Milkina 1970

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		17	0.45	25	0.00	25	0.11	23	0.50	2	0.66	19	0.57
Anderszewski 2003		12	0.47	13	0.00	10	0.18	12	0.66	7	0.70	6	0.68
Ashkenazy 1981		48	0.34	61	0.00	63	0.04	68	0.04	57	0.07	65	0.05
Bacha 2000		36	0.38	37	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.17	12	0.56	38	0.31
Badura 1965		53	0.33	41	0.00	55	0.06	51	0.06	25	0.31	47	0.14
Barbosa 1983		18	0.44	62	0.00	22	0.12	18	0.58	14	0.52	21	0.55
Biret 1990		11	0.47	11	0.00	7	0.23	6	0.74	3	0.77	4	0.75
Blet 2003		63	0.29	43	0.00	74	0.03	78	0.03	76	0.03	87	0.03
Block 1995		79	0.23	88	0.00	62	0.05	62	0.05	68	0.04	83	0.04
Blumental 1952		30	0.40	29	0.00	35	0.10	34	0.36	32	0.31	36	0.33
Boshniakovich 1969		60	0.30	63	0.00	43	0.05	45	0.12	57	0.05	57	0.08
Brailowsky 1960		58	0.31	54	0.00	75	0.03	77	0.03	56	0.06	70	0.04
Bunin 1987		66	0.29	78	0.00	68	0.04	65	0.04	57	0.05	84	0.04
Bunin 1987b		62	0.29	73	0.00	67	0.04	63	0.04	55	0.05	76	0.04
Chiu 1999		38	0.38	46	0.00	40	0.07	41	0.19	41	0.14	45	0.16
Cohen 1997		47	0.34	55	0.00	36	0.09	38	0.29	7	0.64	31	0.43
Cortot 1951		76	0.25	83	0.00	71	0.04	73	0.04	52	0.06	66	0.05
Csalog 1996		74	0.26	75	0.00	73	0.03	76	0.03	58	0.05	81	0.04
Czerny 1949		2	0.56	2	0.22	2	0.36	5	0.74	4	0.82	2	0.78
Czerny 1990		25	0.42	58	0.00	28	0.09	25	0.49	31	0.46	27	0.47
Duchoud 2007		51	0.33	69	0.00	52	0.06	52	0.06	26	0.33	46	0.14
Ezaki 2006		27	0.42	59	0.00	16	0.12	29	0.43	29	0.42	32	0.42
Falvay 1989		5	0.52	3	0.05	5	0.26	8	0.70	4	0.63	12	0.66
Farrell 1958		34	0.38	14	0.00	31	0.10	33	0.36	12	0.49	33	0.42
Ferenczy 1958		50	0.34	28	0.00	64	0.05	57	0.05	26	0.55	44	0.17
Fliere 1977		55	0.32	57	0.00	56	0.04	66	0.04	65	0.04	68	0.04
Fou 1978		20	0.44	9	0.01	30	0.09	28	0.44	27	0.37	34	0.40
Francois 1956		19	0.44	33	0.00	21	0.12	20	0.57	2	0.79	9	0.67
Friedman 1923		86	0.18	56	0.00	86	0.03	84	0.03	75	0.04	89	0.03
Friedman 1923b		85	0.19	81	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	66	0.05	88	0.03
Friedman 1930		83	0.19	70	0.00	83	0.02	89	0.02	80	0.03	90	0.02
Garcia 2007		80	0.23	15	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	40	0.14	56	0.08
Garcia 2007b		70	0.28	23	0.00	47	0.08	49	0.08	31	0.26	48	0.14
Gierzod 1998		35	0.38	67	0.00	39	0.10	39	0.24	42	0.13	43	0.18
Gornostaeva 1994		26	0.42	44	0.00	20	0.11	19	0.57	12	0.61	17	0.59
Groot 1988		32	0.39	36	0.00	32	0.09	31	0.40	35	0.25	37	0.32
Harasiewicz 1955		6	0.52	20	0.00	6	0.23	2	0.81	4	0.66	5	0.73
Hatto 1993		8	0.49	34	0.00	12	0.15	13	0.66	16	0.54	16	0.60
Hatto 1997		7	0.51	4	0.04	9	0.23	7	0.72	6	0.65	7	0.68
Horowitz 1949		72	0.27	48	0.00	72	0.03	80	0.03	50	0.06	77	0.04
Indjic 1988		9	0.49	38	0.00	13	0.16	14	0.66	16	0.58	13	0.62
Kapell 1951		22	0.43	12	0.00	23	0.10	21	0.55	17	0.40	26	0.47
Kissin 1993		54	0.32	65	0.00	58	0.03	75	0.03	63	0.06	80	0.04
Kushner 1989		23	0.43	50	0.00	17	0.09	17	0.58	23	0.42	24	0.49
Luisada 1991		31	0.39	30	0.00	29	0.09	37	0.30	27	0.30	39	0.30
Lushtak 2004		67	0.29	82	0.00	60	0.04	69	0.04	71	0.04	82	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		45	0.35	52	0.00	45	0.07	44	0.14	59	0.05	55	0.08
Magaloff 1978		68	0.28	71	0.00	54	0.06	54	0.06	70	0.03	73	0.04
Magin 1975		42	0.36	27	0.00	48	0.08	48	0.08	60	0.05	59	0.06
Michalowski 1933		78	0.23	76	0.00	70	0.04	71	0.04	30	0.32	49	0.11
Milkina 1970		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Mohovich 1999		24	0.42	16	0.00	18	0.09	15	0.62	12	0.62	14	0.62
Moravec 1969		13	0.46	21	0.00	15	0.17	11	0.67	5	0.66	10	0.66
Morozova 2008		15	0.45	10	0.01	19	0.10	16	0.59	10	0.55	18	0.57
Neighaus 1950		56	0.32	17	0.00	49	0.08	47	0.08	51	0.05	61	0.06
Niedzielski 1931		82	0.20	79	0.00	81	0.04	72	0.04	81	0.03	85	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		37	0.38	26	0.00	37	0.11	35	0.36	30	0.30	35	0.33
Osinska 1989		16	0.45	7	0.02	8	0.27	9	0.69	10	0.64	11	0.66
Pachmann 1927		84	0.19	42	0.00	88	0.03	83	0.03	73	0.04	86	0.03
Paderewski 1930		88	0.17	80	0.00	87	0.03	85	0.03	57	0.05	79	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		81	0.22	91	0.00	82	0.03	81	0.03	63	0.05	69	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		73	0.27	18	0.00	50	0.09	46	0.09	21	0.44	41	0.20
Poblocka 1999		49	0.34	85	0.00	59	0.04	64	0.04	71	0.04	71	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		33	0.38	24	0.00	27	0.11	26	0.48	13	0.61	22	0.54
Rachmaninoff 1923		65	0.29	74	0.00	66	0.05	61	0.05	60	0.04	74	0.04
Rangell 2001		40	0.36	84	0.00	38	0.11	32	0.36	18	0.53	28	0.44
Richter 1976		61	0.29	68	0.00	65	0.04	70	0.04	69	0.05	78	0.04
Rosen 1989		44	0.35	22	0.00	46	0.07	50	0.07	60	0.04	64	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		69	0.28	40	0.00	78	0.05	58	0.05	42	0.19	53	0.10
Rosenthal 1931		64	0.29	60	0.00	76	0.03	82	0.03	35	0.37	50	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.26	45	0.00	80	0.05	56	0.05	38	0.23	51	0.11
Rosenthal 1931c		71	0.28	87	0.00	77	0.04	74	0.04	46	0.06	67	0.05
Rosenthal 1931d		77	0.24	53	0.00	79	0.03	79	0.03	37	0.17	58	0.07
Rossi 2007		87	0.17	86	0.00	84	0.02	88	0.02	49	0.07	72	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		3	0.55	5	0.04	3	0.22	3	0.80	2	0.78	1	0.79
Rubinstein 1952		14	0.46	35	0.00	14	0.15	10	0.69	9	0.65	8	0.67
Rubinstein 1966		4	0.53	6	0.03	4	0.28	4	0.79	6	0.72	3	0.75
Schilhawsky 1960		52	0.33	8	0.01	69	0.05	60	0.05	53	0.05	62	0.05
Shebanova 2002		59	0.30	64	0.00	57	0.05	59	0.05	74	0.05	63	0.05
Smith 1975		29	0.40	49	0.00	33	0.10	36	0.35	16	0.53	29	0.43
Sokolov 2002		21	0.43	31	0.00	24	0.11	27	0.47	6	0.65	20	0.55
Sztompka 1959		43	0.35	72	0.00	44	0.06	43	0.15	42	0.23	42	0.19
Tomsic 1995		39	0.37	66	0.00	34	0.11	30	0.41	15	0.45	30	0.43
Uninsky 1932		41	0.36	47	0.00	41	0.08	40	0.23	30	0.26	40	0.24
Uninsky 1971		10	0.48	19	0.00	11	0.13	22	0.53	12	0.53	23	0.53
Wasowski 1980		28	0.41	32	0.00	26	0.10	24	0.49	25	0.46	25	0.47
Zak 1937		57	0.31	89	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	68	0.04	75	0.04
Zak 1951		46	0.34	77	0.00	51	0.06	53	0.06	48	0.06	60	0.06
Average		1	0.59	1	0.53	1	0.52	1	0.87	25	0.42	15	0.60
Random 1		90	0.00	39	0.00	90	0.02	90	0.02	16	0.42	54	0.09
Random 2		89	0.09	51	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	3	0.52	52	0.10
Random 3		91	-0.09	90	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	75	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).