Gierzod 1998

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		8	0.74	9	0.01	6	0.27	8	0.65	1	0.69	9	0.67
Anderszewski 2003		29	0.67	25	0.00	29	0.09	29	0.41	7	0.58	29	0.49
Ashkenazy 1981		41	0.61	29	0.00	46	0.07	47	0.07	16	0.43	51	0.17
Bacha 2000		81	0.47	66	0.00	76	0.03	76	0.03	34	0.18	84	0.07
Badura 1965		43	0.61	82	0.00	40	0.07	39	0.21	2	0.63	38	0.36
Barbosa 1983		65	0.54	11	0.01	49	0.06	53	0.06	22	0.46	50	0.17
Biret 1990		39	0.62	26	0.00	38	0.08	37	0.22	15	0.44	40	0.31
Blet 2003		53	0.57	63	0.00	66	0.04	59	0.04	12	0.42	65	0.13
Block 1995		77	0.50	46	0.00	50	0.06	51	0.06	23	0.32	61	0.14
Blumental 1952		56	0.56	27	0.00	39	0.07	41	0.17	23	0.28	44	0.22
Boshniakovich 1969		7	0.75	1	0.18	1	0.18	14	0.60	1	0.74	10	0.67
Brailowsky 1960		78	0.50	59	0.00	78	0.03	84	0.03	39	0.23	80	0.08
Bunin 1987		80	0.48	56	0.00	81	0.04	72	0.04	28	0.35	72	0.12
Bunin 1987b		84	0.46	75	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	28	0.37	74	0.11
Chiu 1999		70	0.52	60	0.00	63	0.03	80	0.03	24	0.27	78	0.09
Cohen 1997		87	0.37	67	0.00	87	0.04	64	0.04	40	0.11	85	0.07
Cortot 1951		86	0.45	83	0.00	86	0.04	70	0.04	51	0.05	88	0.04
Csalog 1996		69	0.52	78	0.00	65	0.04	66	0.04	12	0.44	64	0.13
Czerny 1949		5	0.76	10	0.01	7	0.17	7	0.65	4	0.70	8	0.67
Czerny 1990		6	0.75	6	0.04	8	0.10	9	0.63	2	0.76	6	0.69
Duchoud 2007		71	0.52	81	0.00	72	0.04	71	0.04	9	0.45	66	0.13
Ezaki 2006		27	0.67	68	0.00	34	0.10	34	0.35	12	0.59	31	0.45
Falvay 1989		55	0.57	57	0.00	71	0.03	75	0.03	41	0.19	81	0.08
Farrell 1958		61	0.55	36	0.00	53	0.06	48	0.06	29	0.37	54	0.15
Ferenczy 1958		63	0.54	71	0.00	73	0.03	82	0.03	25	0.37	75	0.11
Fliere 1977		2	0.79	5	0.10	3	0.21	2	0.77	1	0.75	3	0.76
Fou 1978		31	0.65	49	0.00	30	0.09	32	0.37	8	0.55	33	0.45
Francois 1956		52	0.58	53	0.00	61	0.04	63	0.04	7	0.60	56	0.15
Friedman 1923		57	0.56	35	0.00	59	0.04	61	0.04	24	0.42	67	0.13
Friedman 1923b		54	0.57	39	0.00	55	0.07	45	0.07	22	0.46	47	0.18
Friedman 1930		44	0.60	79	0.00	45	0.06	50	0.06	11	0.53	46	0.18
Garcia 2007		49	0.58	69	0.00	57	0.05	57	0.05	9	0.53	53	0.16
Garcia 2007b		46	0.59	61	0.00	47	0.07	46	0.07	17	0.49	45	0.19
Gierzod 1998		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Gornostaeva 1994		26	0.68	28	0.00	32	0.09	26	0.44	1	0.74	23	0.57
Groot 1988		76	0.50	43	0.00	56	0.05	56	0.05	41	0.11	86	0.07
Harasiewicz 1955		10	0.73	19	0.01	9	0.12	5	0.67	2	0.74	5	0.70
Hatto 1993		22	0.70	15	0.01	12	0.17	13	0.61	3	0.62	18	0.61
Hatto 1997		20	0.70	13	0.01	13	0.18	15	0.60	3	0.64	15	0.62
Horowitz 1949		68	0.52	73	0.00	67	0.04	60	0.04	21	0.46	59	0.14
Indjic 1988		16	0.71	23	0.00	11	0.14	12	0.61	3	0.64	14	0.62
Kapell 1951		32	0.65	52	0.00	37	0.11	33	0.36	21	0.36	37	0.36
Kissin 1993		1	0.79	2	0.18	2	0.25	1	0.79	1	0.83	1	0.81
Kushner 1989		14	0.71	16	0.01	24	0.11	22	0.52	6	0.64	19	0.58
Luisada 1991		25	0.68	31	0.00	26	0.12	25	0.46	5	0.64	25	0.54
Lushtak 2004		38	0.62	62	0.00	41	0.06	44	0.15	10	0.54	43	0.28
Malcuzynski 1961		48	0.59	47	0.00	51	0.06	54	0.06	13	0.46	48	0.17
Magaloff 1978		36	0.63	38	0.00	44	0.08	43	0.15	1	0.64	39	0.31
Magin 1975		12	0.71	40	0.00	14	0.16	10	0.61	1	0.67	13	0.64
Michalowski 1933		73	0.51	76	0.00	64	0.04	73	0.04	16	0.45	63	0.13
Milkina 1970		11	0.72	14	0.01	18	0.18	11	0.61	2	0.71	11	0.66
Mohovich 1999		37	0.63	30	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.17	19	0.53	41	0.30
Moravec 1969		72	0.51	54	0.00	79	0.03	83	0.03	26	0.33	77	0.10
Morozova 2008		35	0.63	65	0.00	35	0.08	36	0.28	9	0.51	35	0.38
Neighaus 1950		24	0.68	32	0.00	25	0.12	24	0.46	3	0.69	24	0.56
Niedzielski 1931		45	0.60	48	0.00	28	0.11	31	0.37	2	0.55	32	0.45
Ohlsson 1999		18	0.71	84	0.00	16	0.17	16	0.59	2	0.71	12	0.65
Osinska 1989		3	0.78	3	0.16	5	0.25	3	0.75	1	0.80	2	0.77
Pachmann 1927		66	0.53	42	0.00	82	0.03	81	0.03	5	0.51	71	0.12
Paderewski 1930		79	0.48	72	0.00	74	0.03	79	0.03	20	0.45	70	0.12
Perlemuter 1992		50	0.58	58	0.00	58	0.04	65	0.04	17	0.45	62	0.13
Pierdomenico 2008		58	0.56	37	0.00	68	0.05	58	0.05	7	0.52	52	0.16
Poblocka 1999		17	0.71	20	0.00	15	0.15	17	0.56	1	0.67	16	0.61
Rabcewiczowa 1932		59	0.56	41	0.00	48	0.06	52	0.06	17	0.35	57	0.14
Rachmaninoff 1923		40	0.61	74	0.00	31	0.09	35	0.33	10	0.53	34	0.42
Rangell 2001		74	0.51	44	0.00	75	0.03	77	0.03	23	0.39	76	0.11
Richter 1976		47	0.59	50	0.00	54	0.06	49	0.06	19	0.51	49	0.17
Rosen 1989		15	0.71	12	0.01	19	0.21	18	0.54	3	0.68	17	0.61
Rosenthal 1930		62	0.55	55	0.00	69	0.04	67	0.04	20	0.49	60	0.14
Rosenthal 1931		82	0.47	85	0.00	83	0.02	86	0.02	26	0.29	82	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		83	0.47	86	0.00	85	0.03	78	0.03	29	0.28	79	0.09
Rosenthal 1931c		67	0.53	70	0.00	70	0.03	74	0.03	17	0.51	73	0.12
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.45	87	0.00	84	0.02	87	0.02	30	0.31	83	0.08
Rossi 2007		75	0.51	33	0.00	77	0.04	62	0.04	20	0.36	68	0.12
Rubinstein 1939		51	0.58	88	0.00	60	0.04	69	0.04	23	0.37	69	0.12
Rubinstein 1952		60	0.55	64	0.00	52	0.06	55	0.06	27	0.36	55	0.15
Rubinstein 1966		34	0.65	21	0.00	43	0.07	42	0.16	18	0.50	42	0.28
Schilhawsky 1960		21	0.70	22	0.00	23	0.11	23	0.47	5	0.61	26	0.54
Shebanova 2002		4	0.76	4	0.11	4	0.26	4	0.71	1	0.74	4	0.72
Smith 1975		30	0.67	45	0.00	36	0.08	38	0.22	3	0.61	36	0.37
Sokolov 2002		33	0.65	8	0.02	27	0.11	27	0.42	1	0.66	27	0.53
Sztompka 1959		9	0.73	34	0.00	10	0.14	6	0.65	2	0.70	7	0.67
Tomsic 1995		64	0.54	51	0.00	62	0.04	68	0.04	17	0.50	58	0.14
Uninsky 1932		42	0.61	24	0.00	22	0.10	30	0.38	7	0.57	30	0.47
Uninsky 1971		23	0.69	7	0.02	17	0.19	19	0.54	8	0.62	20	0.58
Wasowski 1980		28	0.67	77	0.00	33	0.11	28	0.41	3	0.61	28	0.50
Zak 1937		13	0.71	17	0.01	21	0.15	21	0.52	6	0.63	21	0.57
Zak 1951		19	0.71	18	0.01	20	0.13	20	0.52	5	0.63	22	0.57
Random 1		90	-0.09	80	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	60	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		88	-0.02	89	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	31	0.20	87	0.06
Random 3		89	-0.08	90	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	72	0.04	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).