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		17	0.66	37	0.00	20	0.10	23	0.39	37	0.21	34	0.29
Anderszewski 2003		3	0.71	49	0.00	11	0.14	8	0.64	6	0.59	7	0.61
Ashkenazy 1981		33	0.62	59	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.13	34	0.22	45	0.17
Bacha 2000		39	0.60	50	0.00	38	0.07	35	0.22	3	0.58	27	0.36
Badura 1965		47	0.58	35	0.00	51	0.04	69	0.04	36	0.27	61	0.10
Barbosa 1983		14	0.67	8	0.03	8	0.12	16	0.55	3	0.65	10	0.60
Biret 1990		23	0.65	15	0.01	19	0.14	18	0.50	18	0.41	19	0.45
Blet 2003		60	0.54	71	0.00	69	0.04	64	0.04	44	0.09	74	0.06
Block 1995		34	0.61	6	0.04	27	0.07	27	0.34	6	0.57	20	0.44
Blumental 1952		13	0.67	4	0.05	14	0.12	10	0.61	4	0.55	11	0.58
Boshniakovich 1969		51	0.57	81	0.00	53	0.04	62	0.04	52	0.06	79	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		36	0.61	14	0.01	41	0.06	41	0.14	13	0.60	33	0.29
Bunin 1987		82	0.43	83	0.00	80	0.04	74	0.04	36	0.21	63	0.09
Bunin 1987b		83	0.43	63	0.00	77	0.03	82	0.03	34	0.26	62	0.09
Chiu 1999		25	0.64	23	0.01	29	0.07	33	0.28	4	0.52	24	0.38
Cohen 1997		81	0.43	68	0.00	86	0.04	65	0.04	42	0.11	71	0.07
Cortot 1951		66	0.50	54	0.00	66	0.04	70	0.04	37	0.22	64	0.09
Csalog 1996		70	0.48	77	0.00	52	0.05	58	0.05	22	0.36	51	0.13
Czerny 1949		16	0.66	16	0.01	10	0.13	13	0.59	14	0.54	12	0.56
Czerny 1990		2	0.72	5	0.05	3	0.22	3	0.72	9	0.64	3	0.68
Duchoud 2007		86	0.39	84	0.00	85	0.04	77	0.04	52	0.06	78	0.05
Ezaki 2006		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Falvay 1989		28	0.63	22	0.01	39	0.07	39	0.18	12	0.50	31	0.30
Farrell 1958		35	0.61	18	0.01	31	0.07	34	0.28	23	0.43	30	0.35
Ferenczy 1958		59	0.54	65	0.00	70	0.04	68	0.04	40	0.17	66	0.08
Fliere 1977		8	0.70	9	0.03	12	0.13	9	0.61	32	0.22	25	0.37
Fou 1978		12	0.67	33	0.00	24	0.07	22	0.40	24	0.35	26	0.37
Francois 1956		75	0.45	55	0.00	79	0.03	85	0.03	45	0.07	80	0.05
Friedman 1923		54	0.56	82	0.00	65	0.06	53	0.06	38	0.20	59	0.11
Friedman 1923b		53	0.56	69	0.00	63	0.07	47	0.07	37	0.24	52	0.13
Friedman 1930		55	0.56	85	0.00	64	0.05	57	0.05	33	0.30	55	0.12
Garcia 2007		69	0.49	78	0.00	75	0.03	79	0.03	62	0.04	87	0.03
Garcia 2007b		68	0.49	40	0.00	68	0.04	75	0.04	81	0.03	88	0.03
Gierzod 1998		11	0.67	21	0.01	13	0.14	12	0.59	34	0.35	18	0.45
Gornostaeva 1994		40	0.59	61	0.00	49	0.05	56	0.05	25	0.33	53	0.13
Groot 1988		63	0.53	74	0.00	48	0.04	66	0.04	38	0.12	72	0.07
Harasiewicz 1955		1	0.76	1	0.27	1	0.27	1	0.76	5	0.70	1	0.73
Hatto 1993		24	0.65	43	0.00	34	0.11	30	0.31	33	0.23	35	0.27
Hatto 1997		19	0.66	38	0.00	32	0.07	29	0.32	39	0.16	38	0.23
Horowitz 1949		72	0.47	57	0.00	78	0.03	86	0.03	51	0.07	75	0.05
Indjic 1988		22	0.65	39	0.00	33	0.06	31	0.31	39	0.19	37	0.24
Kapell 1951		27	0.63	12	0.02	7	0.12	7	0.64	10	0.47	13	0.55
Kissin 1993		10	0.68	17	0.01	17	0.18	17	0.54	30	0.40	17	0.46
Kushner 1989		30	0.63	45	0.00	36	0.08	36	0.21	43	0.13	43	0.17
Luisada 1991		9	0.69	47	0.00	18	0.16	19	0.48	15	0.45	16	0.46
Lushtak 2004		37	0.60	60	0.00	57	0.06	54	0.06	46	0.08	70	0.07
Malcuzynski 1961		43	0.59	10	0.02	9	0.12	14	0.56	3	0.65	9	0.60
Magaloff 1978		46	0.59	48	0.00	59	0.08	45	0.08	23	0.31	46	0.16
Magin 1975		18	0.66	42	0.00	16	0.14	15	0.55	23	0.43	15	0.49
Michalowski 1933		84	0.42	86	0.00	83	0.03	87	0.03	53	0.06	83	0.04
Milkina 1970		4	0.71	2	0.17	2	0.28	2	0.74	5	0.67	2	0.70
Mohovich 1999		15	0.67	11	0.02	15	0.14	11	0.61	8	0.66	6	0.63
Moravec 1969		45	0.59	29	0.00	21	0.08	24	0.38	4	0.67	14	0.50
Morozova 2008		31	0.62	56	0.00	35	0.08	38	0.19	35	0.25	40	0.22
Neighaus 1950		71	0.48	87	0.00	82	0.04	78	0.04	58	0.05	84	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		62	0.53	75	0.00	60	0.06	52	0.06	35	0.20	56	0.11
Ohlsson 1999		57	0.55	19	0.01	43	0.06	43	0.13	71	0.04	67	0.07
Osinska 1989		6	0.71	7	0.03	6	0.13	4	0.71	25	0.50	8	0.60
Pachmann 1927		73	0.46	32	0.00	84	0.03	80	0.03	23	0.38	57	0.11
Paderewski 1930		87	0.32	88	0.00	87	0.04	76	0.04	74	0.03	86	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		67	0.50	62	0.00	76	0.03	83	0.03	62	0.04	85	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		85	0.42	70	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	67	0.05	81	0.04
Poblocka 1999		32	0.62	27	0.00	23	0.07	21	0.41	36	0.31	28	0.36
Rabcewiczowa 1932		65	0.52	41	0.00	47	0.05	60	0.05	61	0.04	82	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		20	0.65	44	0.00	22	0.08	20	0.46	14	0.41	21	0.43
Rangell 2001		77	0.45	31	0.00	62	0.07	46	0.07	15	0.46	42	0.18
Richter 1976		52	0.57	25	0.00	56	0.06	55	0.06	33	0.37	47	0.15
Rosen 1989		26	0.64	28	0.00	30	0.07	28	0.32	28	0.29	32	0.30
Rosenthal 1930		76	0.45	66	0.00	74	0.04	71	0.04	31	0.27	60	0.10
Rosenthal 1931		74	0.46	76	0.00	67	0.04	67	0.04	12	0.55	48	0.15
Rosenthal 1931b		80	0.43	58	0.00	73	0.03	81	0.03	21	0.41	58	0.11
Rosenthal 1931c		78	0.45	79	0.00	71	0.04	73	0.04	23	0.40	54	0.13
Rosenthal 1931d		79	0.44	64	0.00	72	0.04	72	0.04	15	0.53	49	0.15
Rossi 2007		50	0.58	24	0.00	58	0.06	48	0.06	6	0.55	41	0.18
Rubinstein 1939		48	0.58	46	0.00	45	0.05	61	0.05	18	0.39	50	0.14
Rubinstein 1952		61	0.54	51	0.00	37	0.07	40	0.17	32	0.30	39	0.23
Rubinstein 1966		21	0.65	34	0.00	25	0.08	25	0.38	25	0.42	23	0.40
Schilhawsky 1960		41	0.59	72	0.00	55	0.06	51	0.06	42	0.10	65	0.08
Shebanova 2002		38	0.60	30	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	77	0.04	68	0.07
Smith 1975		29	0.63	20	0.01	40	0.07	37	0.20	24	0.31	36	0.25
Sokolov 2002		58	0.55	26	0.00	26	0.08	26	0.38	10	0.47	22	0.42
Sztompka 1959		42	0.59	89	0.00	54	0.06	49	0.06	58	0.05	76	0.05
Tomsic 1995		64	0.53	53	0.00	61	0.06	50	0.06	18	0.48	44	0.17
Uninsky 1932		44	0.59	36	0.00	28	0.07	32	0.30	25	0.43	29	0.36
Uninsky 1971		56	0.55	52	0.00	46	0.04	63	0.04	53	0.06	77	0.05
Wasowski 1980		49	0.58	73	0.00	50	0.05	59	0.05	50	0.07	73	0.06
Zak 1937		5	0.71	13	0.02	5	0.14	6	0.64	7	0.62	4	0.63
Zak 1951		7	0.71	3	0.06	4	0.14	5	0.66	6	0.61	5	0.63
Random 1		89	-0.08	90	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	48	0.04	89	0.02
Random 2		88	-0.01	80	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	22	0.28	69	0.07
Random 3		90	-0.08	67	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	45	0.05	90	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).