Rossi 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		66	0.16	55	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	89	0.02	86	0.02
Anderszewski 2003		75	0.12	79	0.00	67	0.05	58	0.05	77	0.03	59	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		68	0.15	45	0.00	76	0.04	72	0.04	88	0.03	73	0.03
Bacha 2000		70	0.15	72	0.00	82	0.02	78	0.02	82	0.03	79	0.02
Badura 1965		82	0.08	31	0.00	66	0.04	69	0.04	70	0.03	70	0.03
Barbosa 1983		81	0.09	80	0.00	71	0.03	74	0.03	83	0.02	84	0.02
Biret 1990		16	0.28	36	0.00	41	0.06	36	0.24	81	0.03	42	0.08
Blet 2003		63	0.17	38	0.00	64	0.05	54	0.05	87	0.02	67	0.03
Block 1995		42	0.22	27	0.00	32	0.07	34	0.26	80	0.03	38	0.09
Blumental 1952		85	0.06	85	0.00	86	0.02	80	0.02	88	0.02	87	0.02
Boshniakovich 1969		14	0.28	59	0.00	23	0.07	26	0.34	84	0.04	25	0.12
Brailowsky 1960		88	0.04	56	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	90	0.01	89	0.01
Bunin 1987		54	0.19	82	0.00	54	0.04	66	0.04	86	0.03	74	0.03
Bunin 1987b		53	0.19	81	0.00	53	0.04	71	0.04	65	0.04	57	0.04
Chiu 1999		28	0.25	26	0.00	47	0.07	47	0.07	82	0.03	48	0.05
Cohen 1997		17	0.28	22	0.00	24	0.07	31	0.30	59	0.04	30	0.11
Cortot 1951		36	0.23	44	0.00	38	0.06	37	0.24	66	0.05	31	0.11
Csalog 1996		4	0.36	8	0.02	3	0.17	3	0.69	34	0.16	2	0.33
Czerny 1949		12	0.30	21	0.01	27	0.06	23	0.37	63	0.05	17	0.14
Czerny 1990		73	0.14	77	0.00	74	0.03	76	0.03	87	0.03	75	0.03
Duchoud 2007		45	0.22	53	0.00	42	0.07	38	0.22	71	0.04	37	0.09
Ezaki 2006		41	0.22	54	0.00	60	0.05	61	0.05	80	0.04	53	0.04
Falvay 1989		46	0.21	23	0.00	21	0.07	35	0.25	82	0.03	36	0.09
Farrell 1958		47	0.21	2	0.08	6	0.12	12	0.48	39	0.15	5	0.27
Ferenczy 1958		71	0.14	66	0.00	78	0.03	77	0.03	79	0.03	69	0.03
Fliere 1977		10	0.32	14	0.01	8	0.11	7	0.60	80	0.04	14	0.15
Fou 1978		51	0.20	70	0.00	63	0.05	55	0.05	71	0.04	55	0.04
Francois 1956		33	0.24	19	0.01	48	0.07	46	0.07	72	0.03	52	0.05
Friedman 1923		56	0.18	69	0.00	57	0.05	60	0.05	87	0.03	64	0.04
Friedman 1923b		58	0.18	49	0.00	58	0.05	62	0.05	84	0.03	62	0.04
Friedman 1930		59	0.18	78	0.00	62	0.05	56	0.05	85	0.03	61	0.04
Garcia 2007		23	0.25	15	0.01	9	0.15	8	0.59	65	0.05	11	0.17
Garcia 2007b		25	0.25	25	0.00	35	0.07	25	0.35	48	0.06	19	0.14
Gierzod 1998		30	0.24	30	0.00	25	0.07	27	0.34	73	0.04	24	0.12
Gornostaeva 1994		2	0.39	4	0.04	5	0.13	4	0.65	49	0.07	8	0.21
Groot 1988		65	0.16	86	0.00	69	0.04	63	0.04	80	0.03	77	0.03
Harasiewicz 1955		29	0.24	75	0.00	36	0.07	32	0.29	83	0.03	39	0.09
Hatto 1993		83	0.08	91	0.00	85	0.02	81	0.02	89	0.02	88	0.02
Hatto 1997		77	0.10	90	0.00	83	0.02	82	0.02	88	0.03	85	0.02
Horowitz 1949		86	0.05	57	0.00	87	0.01	88	0.01	89	0.02	90	0.01
Indjic 1988		84	0.06	87	0.00	84	0.02	84	0.02	89	0.02	83	0.02
Kapell 1951		57	0.18	52	0.00	55	0.04	65	0.04	82	0.03	66	0.03
Kissin 1993		37	0.23	50	0.00	17	0.08	11	0.50	70	0.05	13	0.16
Kushner 1989		27	0.25	60	0.00	33	0.07	28	0.33	88	0.03	33	0.10
Luisada 1991		72	0.14	68	0.00	77	0.02	79	0.02	86	0.03	81	0.02
Lushtak 2004		22	0.25	20	0.01	19	0.09	13	0.48	69	0.04	18	0.14
Malcuzynski 1961		26	0.25	33	0.00	15	0.11	10	0.57	64	0.05	9	0.17
Magaloff 1978		3	0.36	3	0.06	2	0.21	6	0.61	62	0.04	12	0.16
Magin 1975		19	0.26	18	0.01	26	0.07	20	0.39	66	0.04	21	0.12
Michalowski 1933		48	0.21	63	0.00	52	0.04	67	0.04	55	0.06	49	0.05
Milkina 1970		61	0.17	62	0.00	46	0.07	49	0.07	88	0.02	56	0.04
Mohovich 1999		52	0.20	67	0.00	59	0.04	64	0.04	85	0.03	72	0.03
Moravec 1969		74	0.13	88	0.00	75	0.03	73	0.03	89	0.02	80	0.02
Morozova 2008		62	0.17	41	0.00	68	0.05	59	0.05	83	0.03	60	0.04
Neighaus 1950		39	0.22	24	0.00	39	0.06	41	0.20	84	0.03	43	0.08
Niedzielski 1931		67	0.16	9	0.02	22	0.07	43	0.17	66	0.04	40	0.08
Ohlsson 1999		18	0.26	43	0.00	30	0.07	24	0.36	87	0.03	34	0.10
Osinska 1989		1	0.45	1	0.54	1	0.53	1	0.85	36	0.25	1	0.46
Pachmann 1927		11	0.31	13	0.01	13	0.14	19	0.41	39	0.17	7	0.26
Paderewski 1930		21	0.26	10	0.02	14	0.12	17	0.44	44	0.17	6	0.27
Perlemuter 1992		8	0.32	7	0.02	7	0.10	5	0.64	41	0.14	3	0.30
Pierdomenico 2008		7	0.32	11	0.02	11	0.15	14	0.47	38	0.17	4	0.28
Poblocka 1999		69	0.15	73	0.00	79	0.02	83	0.02	82	0.03	82	0.02
Rabcewiczowa 1932		9	0.32	17	0.01	16	0.09	15	0.47	65	0.05	15	0.15
Rachmaninoff 1923		79	0.10	37	0.00	56	0.06	52	0.06	88	0.02	65	0.03
Rangell 2001		55	0.19	83	0.00	43	0.08	39	0.20	80	0.02	46	0.06
Richter 1976		15	0.28	32	0.00	20	0.08	30	0.31	79	0.04	27	0.11
Rosen 1989		6	0.32	5	0.03	12	0.11	18	0.42	70	0.04	20	0.13
Rosenthal 1930		87	0.04	84	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	90	0.01	91	0.01
Rosenthal 1931		80	0.10	74	0.00	70	0.04	70	0.04	72	0.04	58	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		76	0.11	65	0.00	73	0.04	68	0.04	82	0.03	78	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		64	0.17	89	0.00	65	0.06	50	0.06	78	0.03	63	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		78	0.10	58	0.00	72	0.03	75	0.03	80	0.03	76	0.03
Rossi 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rubinstein 1939		60	0.18	28	0.00	40	0.06	44	0.16	86	0.02	44	0.06
Rubinstein 1952		13	0.30	12	0.01	10	0.14	9	0.57	69	0.04	16	0.15
Rubinstein 1966		32	0.24	34	0.00	31	0.09	21	0.39	74	0.03	29	0.11
Schilhawsky 1960		38	0.23	51	0.00	61	0.06	51	0.06	87	0.02	68	0.03
Shebanova 2002		35	0.23	46	0.00	50	0.06	53	0.06	81	0.04	51	0.05
Smith 1975		31	0.24	40	0.00	51	0.05	57	0.05	78	0.03	54	0.04
Sokolov 2002		44	0.22	47	0.00	49	0.07	48	0.07	75	0.03	47	0.05
Sztompka 1959		24	0.25	64	0.00	37	0.08	33	0.28	74	0.04	28	0.11
Tomsic 1995		34	0.24	35	0.00	44	0.08	42	0.18	73	0.04	41	0.08
Uninsky 1932		50	0.21	29	0.00	18	0.09	16	0.46	84	0.03	23	0.12
Uninsky 1971		20	0.26	48	0.00	34	0.08	45	0.14	87	0.02	50	0.05
Wasowski 1980		49	0.21	71	0.00	45	0.10	40	0.20	59	0.05	32	0.10
Zak 1937		43	0.22	39	0.00	29	0.07	29	0.33	69	0.04	26	0.11
Zak 1951		40	0.22	6	0.02	28	0.06	22	0.37	79	0.04	22	0.12
Average		5	0.35	76	0.00	4	0.14	2	0.71	73	0.04	10	0.17
Random 1		90	-0.04	42	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	40	0.11	71	0.03
Random 2		91	-0.05	61	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	36	0.20	45	0.06
Random 3		89	0.00	16	0.01	80	0.02	85	0.02	7	0.49	35	0.10

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).