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		9	0.67	34	0.00	12	0.11	17	0.39	15	0.48	18	0.43
Anderszewski 2003		20	0.65	9	0.00	32	0.08	32	0.25	22	0.45	30	0.34
Ashkenazy 1981		21	0.64	35	0.00	26	0.08	26	0.29	17	0.42	28	0.35
Bacha 2000		49	0.53	21	0.00	61	0.04	74	0.04	16	0.36	56	0.12
Badura 1965		23	0.63	22	0.00	34	0.06	29	0.27	6	0.60	23	0.40
Barbosa 1983		44	0.55	36	0.00	64	0.04	72	0.04	50	0.06	76	0.05
Biret 1990		40	0.57	13	0.00	40	0.07	37	0.20	31	0.24	40	0.22
Blet 2003		57	0.50	37	0.00	59	0.04	63	0.04	10	0.44	53	0.13
Block 1995		65	0.46	38	0.00	56	0.05	55	0.05	43	0.11	69	0.07
Blumental 1952		25	0.62	39	0.00	30	0.05	25	0.29	12	0.40	31	0.34
Boshniakovich 1969		27	0.61	8	0.00	14	0.11	12	0.48	7	0.59	12	0.53
Brailowsky 1960		61	0.48	40	0.00	77	0.05	53	0.05	63	0.05	73	0.05
Bunin 1987		69	0.44	41	0.00	71	0.03	80	0.03	21	0.40	61	0.11
Bunin 1987b		72	0.43	14	0.00	72	0.06	50	0.06	21	0.40	47	0.15
Chiu 1999		29	0.60	42	0.00	48	0.06	49	0.06	19	0.34	48	0.14
Cohen 1997		60	0.48	43	0.00	69	0.04	66	0.04	14	0.40	55	0.13
Cortot 1951		64	0.47	44	0.00	66	0.04	70	0.04	13	0.52	50	0.14
Csalog 1996		78	0.39	10	0.00	74	0.05	59	0.05	41	0.13	67	0.08
Czerny 1949		17	0.65	5	0.00	10	0.11	7	0.54	10	0.58	9	0.56
Czerny 1990		11	0.66	45	0.00	22	0.08	18	0.38	18	0.47	19	0.42
Duchoud 2007		68	0.44	46	0.00	70	0.03	82	0.03	35	0.18	68	0.07
Ezaki 2006		18	0.65	47	0.00	33	0.06	33	0.23	30	0.31	36	0.27
Falvay 1989		75	0.41	15	0.00	83	0.03	81	0.03	58	0.06	78	0.04
Farrell 1958		38	0.58	23	0.00	53	0.06	47	0.06	42	0.18	62	0.10
Ferenczy 1958		45	0.55	48	0.00	45	0.07	46	0.07	12	0.50	44	0.19
Fliere 1977		3	0.71	3	0.00	4	0.21	5	0.57	3	0.55	8	0.56
Fou 1978		39	0.57	49	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.10	41	0.16	52	0.13
Francois 1956		71	0.44	50	0.00	73	0.04	71	0.04	44	0.12	70	0.07
Friedman 1923		7	0.69	24	0.00	7	0.13	11	0.48	4	0.71	6	0.58
Friedman 1923b		4	0.70	51	0.00	6	0.13	10	0.50	4	0.71	4	0.60
Friedman 1930		13	0.66	25	0.00	15	0.12	13	0.43	3	0.65	11	0.53
Garcia 2007		54	0.52	52	0.00	58	0.04	67	0.04	28	0.39	60	0.12
Garcia 2007b		50	0.53	53	0.00	37	0.07	30	0.26	15	0.51	27	0.36
Gierzod 1998		5	0.70	16	0.00	5	0.31	3	0.62	13	0.61	3	0.61
Gornostaeva 1994		66	0.46	17	0.00	63	0.04	73	0.04	62	0.03	88	0.03
Groot 1988		56	0.51	18	0.00	51	0.05	54	0.05	34	0.15	65	0.09
Harasiewicz 1955		6	0.70	11	0.00	11	0.11	8	0.53	18	0.57	10	0.55
Hatto 1993		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Hatto 1997		2	0.99	2	0.22	2	0.97	2	0.99	2	1.00	2	0.99
Horowitz 1949		62	0.48	54	0.00	57	0.05	58	0.05	14	0.50	46	0.16
Indjic 1988		1	0.99	1	0.78	1	0.77	1	1.00	2	1.00	1	1.00
Kapell 1951		52	0.52	19	0.00	39	0.07	34	0.22	38	0.20	42	0.21
Kissin 1993		30	0.60	26	0.00	27	0.09	23	0.34	28	0.45	24	0.39
Kushner 1989		32	0.59	55	0.00	42	0.07	38	0.20	39	0.21	43	0.20
Luisada 1991		15	0.66	56	0.00	25	0.09	31	0.25	13	0.47	29	0.34
Lushtak 2004		19	0.65	27	0.00	31	0.06	27	0.29	16	0.50	26	0.38
Malcuzynski 1961		74	0.41	57	0.00	46	0.05	57	0.05	45	0.06	74	0.05
Magaloff 1978		53	0.52	4	0.00	52	0.05	52	0.05	28	0.27	58	0.12
Magin 1975		41	0.57	58	0.00	28	0.08	35	0.22	33	0.28	38	0.25
Michalowski 1933		76	0.39	59	0.00	68	0.03	77	0.03	35	0.23	66	0.08
Milkina 1970		43	0.56	60	0.00	50	0.06	51	0.06	52	0.06	72	0.06
Mohovich 1999		47	0.54	61	0.00	49	0.05	56	0.05	35	0.32	54	0.13
Moravec 1969		79	0.38	62	0.00	81	0.03	85	0.03	75	0.03	84	0.03
Morozova 2008		24	0.63	6	0.00	20	0.06	28	0.27	22	0.41	32	0.33
Neighaus 1950		35	0.59	63	0.00	17	0.11	15	0.41	7	0.59	14	0.49
Niedzielski 1931		48	0.53	28	0.00	29	0.04	40	0.19	10	0.47	33	0.30
Ohlsson 1999		22	0.63	64	0.00	23	0.07	22	0.36	21	0.44	22	0.40
Osinska 1989		8	0.67	65	0.00	9	0.11	4	0.58	10	0.61	5	0.59
Pachmann 1927		82	0.35	66	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	71	0.03	86	0.03
Paderewski 1930		73	0.42	67	0.00	65	0.04	69	0.04	14	0.49	49	0.14
Perlemuter 1992		55	0.52	68	0.00	62	0.05	60	0.05	29	0.29	57	0.12
Pierdomenico 2008		80	0.37	7	0.00	75	0.04	62	0.04	46	0.10	71	0.06
Poblocka 1999		42	0.56	29	0.00	16	0.09	20	0.38	16	0.49	17	0.43
Rabcewiczowa 1932		63	0.47	30	0.00	60	0.03	76	0.03	49	0.05	79	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		31	0.59	69	0.00	35	0.05	39	0.19	28	0.27	39	0.23
Rangell 2001		87	0.28	70	0.00	78	0.03	83	0.03	58	0.05	80	0.04
Richter 1976		58	0.50	71	0.00	47	0.05	61	0.05	12	0.55	45	0.17
Rosen 1989		36	0.58	20	0.00	36	0.06	36	0.21	19	0.39	35	0.29
Rosenthal 1930		77	0.39	72	0.00	76	0.04	64	0.04	37	0.19	64	0.09
Rosenthal 1931		85	0.30	73	0.00	85	0.03	87	0.03	68	0.04	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		86	0.30	74	0.00	86	0.03	78	0.03	65	0.05	82	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		83	0.34	75	0.00	79	0.03	84	0.03	52	0.05	83	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		84	0.30	76	0.00	87	0.04	68	0.04	57	0.04	81	0.04
Rossi 2007		67	0.45	77	0.00	80	0.03	79	0.03	76	0.04	85	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		34	0.59	78	0.00	43	0.06	43	0.11	20	0.39	41	0.21
Rubinstein 1952		70	0.44	79	0.00	67	0.04	65	0.04	51	0.06	77	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		16	0.66	80	0.00	24	0.07	24	0.31	20	0.48	25	0.39
Schilhawsky 1960		10	0.67	12	0.00	13	0.13	14	0.42	17	0.53	15	0.47
Shebanova 2002		26	0.62	81	0.00	8	0.10	9	0.51	13	0.52	13	0.51
Smith 1975		46	0.55	82	0.00	55	0.08	45	0.08	40	0.17	59	0.12
Sokolov 2002		51	0.52	31	0.00	54	0.06	48	0.06	27	0.28	51	0.13
Sztompka 1959		33	0.59	83	0.00	18	0.14	16	0.40	22	0.51	16	0.45
Tomsic 1995		81	0.37	84	0.00	82	0.04	75	0.04	58	0.06	75	0.05
Uninsky 1932		59	0.50	85	0.00	38	0.08	41	0.18	20	0.46	34	0.29
Uninsky 1971		37	0.58	32	0.00	3	0.18	6	0.55	13	0.60	7	0.57
Wasowski 1980		28	0.60	86	0.00	41	0.06	42	0.17	25	0.40	37	0.26
Zak 1937		14	0.66	87	0.00	19	0.07	19	0.38	18	0.45	20	0.41
Zak 1951		12	0.66	88	0.00	21	0.06	21	0.37	20	0.45	21	0.41
Random 1		89	-0.13	89	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	80	0.02	89	0.01
Random 2		88	0.01	90	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	12	0.40	63	0.09
Random 3		90	-0.14	33	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	82	0.02	90	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).