Lushtak 2004

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		50	0.53	72	0.00	66	0.04	70	0.04	66	0.04	78	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		19	0.60	44	0.00	34	0.06	28	0.31	31	0.35	24	0.33
Ashkenazy 1981		47	0.53	50	0.00	46	0.05	62	0.05	44	0.11	62	0.07
Bacha 2000		66	0.47	73	0.00	69	0.04	72	0.04	40	0.12	60	0.07
Badura 1965		52	0.52	49	0.00	62	0.05	52	0.05	47	0.08	64	0.06
Barbosa 1983		17	0.62	12	0.01	24	0.09	23	0.41	12	0.55	11	0.47
Biret 1990		21	0.60	24	0.00	15	0.09	11	0.53	17	0.43	10	0.48
Blet 2003		51	0.53	78	0.00	58	0.05	53	0.05	18	0.35	45	0.13
Block 1995		59	0.51	74	0.00	57	0.07	47	0.07	39	0.13	53	0.10
Blumental 1952		31	0.58	86	0.00	45	0.05	57	0.05	52	0.05	71	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		44	0.54	41	0.00	38	0.06	36	0.22	59	0.05	54	0.10
Brailowsky 1960		39	0.55	16	0.01	29	0.06	40	0.14	18	0.48	32	0.26
Bunin 1987		69	0.45	77	0.00	63	0.06	51	0.06	31	0.32	43	0.14
Bunin 1987b		71	0.45	75	0.00	59	0.05	63	0.05	29	0.35	44	0.13
Chiu 1999		20	0.60	53	0.00	52	0.05	58	0.05	25	0.26	48	0.11
Cohen 1997		57	0.52	36	0.00	67	0.05	61	0.05	6	0.47	41	0.15
Cortot 1951		70	0.45	15	0.01	61	0.05	65	0.05	41	0.13	58	0.08
Csalog 1996		64	0.48	26	0.00	42	0.06	42	0.13	19	0.38	38	0.22
Czerny 1949		36	0.56	17	0.01	44	0.05	44	0.10	47	0.07	57	0.08
Czerny 1990		11	0.63	9	0.02	23	0.08	24	0.38	41	0.16	36	0.25
Duchoud 2007		74	0.44	57	0.00	70	0.04	66	0.04	24	0.28	49	0.11
Ezaki 2006		18	0.60	63	0.00	53	0.08	46	0.08	54	0.06	59	0.07
Falvay 1989		16	0.62	8	0.03	8	0.11	22	0.42	6	0.56	8	0.48
Farrell 1958		10	0.64	20	0.01	12	0.11	9	0.55	11	0.53	6	0.54
Ferenczy 1958		61	0.50	47	0.00	65	0.04	68	0.04	43	0.15	56	0.08
Fliere 1977		4	0.66	14	0.01	6	0.20	5	0.65	30	0.25	16	0.40
Fou 1978		30	0.58	81	0.00	22	0.08	26	0.34	36	0.19	35	0.25
Francois 1956		45	0.54	66	0.00	49	0.05	56	0.05	16	0.50	40	0.16
Friedman 1923		56	0.52	82	0.00	72	0.03	79	0.03	66	0.05	82	0.04
Friedman 1923b		54	0.52	68	0.00	71	0.04	71	0.04	57	0.05	79	0.04
Friedman 1930		58	0.51	64	0.00	74	0.03	80	0.03	51	0.06	77	0.04
Garcia 2007		62	0.50	76	0.00	68	0.05	59	0.05	47	0.06	69	0.05
Garcia 2007b		48	0.53	43	0.00	31	0.06	32	0.23	27	0.35	31	0.28
Gierzod 1998		14	0.62	22	0.00	19	0.09	10	0.54	44	0.15	30	0.28
Gornostaeva 1994		60	0.50	35	0.00	56	0.05	54	0.05	45	0.05	72	0.05
Groot 1988		35	0.56	13	0.01	7	0.11	18	0.45	8	0.47	12	0.46
Harasiewicz 1955		3	0.66	5	0.08	11	0.12	13	0.52	33	0.31	17	0.40
Hatto 1993		8	0.65	87	0.00	21	0.15	16	0.50	27	0.29	20	0.38
Hatto 1997		7	0.65	31	0.00	14	0.09	14	0.51	27	0.27	21	0.37
Horowitz 1949		81	0.40	58	0.00	80	0.03	85	0.03	56	0.06	75	0.04
Indjic 1988		6	0.65	33	0.00	20	0.10	15	0.51	25	0.30	19	0.39
Kapell 1951		33	0.57	27	0.00	13	0.08	17	0.49	27	0.27	22	0.36
Kissin 1993		22	0.60	83	0.00	27	0.08	25	0.36	41	0.24	28	0.29
Kushner 1989		2	0.67	3	0.10	3	0.33	1	0.76	5	0.65	1	0.70
Luisada 1991		23	0.59	79	0.00	51	0.07	48	0.07	68	0.04	65	0.05
Lushtak 2004		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Malcuzynski 1961		79	0.41	61	0.00	78	0.03	75	0.03	72	0.03	84	0.03
Magaloff 1978		38	0.55	34	0.00	30	0.08	37	0.21	21	0.33	33	0.26
Magin 1975		53	0.52	30	0.00	50	0.06	49	0.06	52	0.05	67	0.05
Michalowski 1933		86	0.32	69	0.00	87	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.04	76	0.04
Milkina 1970		41	0.55	29	0.00	32	0.07	31	0.24	53	0.06	46	0.12
Mohovich 1999		26	0.59	18	0.01	17	0.11	19	0.44	22	0.46	13	0.45
Moravec 1969		73	0.44	88	0.00	81	0.03	74	0.03	49	0.06	73	0.04
Morozova 2008		25	0.59	32	0.00	28	0.09	27	0.32	26	0.35	25	0.33
Neighaus 1950		27	0.58	38	0.00	35	0.05	30	0.29	21	0.39	23	0.34
Niedzielski 1931		75	0.43	67	0.00	77	0.03	82	0.03	85	0.03	83	0.03
Ohlsson 1999		24	0.59	19	0.01	18	0.13	7	0.58	17	0.46	7	0.52
Osinska 1989		9	0.65	4	0.09	5	0.19	4	0.66	24	0.50	5	0.57
Pachmann 1927		68	0.46	46	0.00	76	0.03	81	0.03	13	0.47	47	0.12
Paderewski 1930		80	0.40	56	0.00	79	0.03	84	0.03	78	0.03	85	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		40	0.55	52	0.00	37	0.05	35	0.22	21	0.41	27	0.30
Pierdomenico 2008		77	0.43	51	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.12	15	0.45	37	0.23
Poblocka 1999		28	0.58	62	0.00	25	0.09	21	0.44	33	0.34	18	0.39
Rabcewiczowa 1932		37	0.56	21	0.01	16	0.09	20	0.44	15	0.40	15	0.42
Rachmaninoff 1923		46	0.53	48	0.00	55	0.08	45	0.08	52	0.05	63	0.06
Rangell 2001		78	0.41	11	0.01	39	0.08	34	0.22	20	0.39	29	0.29
Richter 1976		65	0.47	10	0.02	60	0.05	64	0.05	43	0.16	55	0.09
Rosen 1989		49	0.53	45	0.00	47	0.05	60	0.05	55	0.05	70	0.05
Rosenthal 1930		82	0.40	65	0.00	75	0.04	73	0.04	36	0.23	52	0.10
Rosenthal 1931		84	0.33	42	0.00	84	0.03	83	0.03	41	0.16	61	0.07
Rosenthal 1931b		85	0.32	85	0.00	85	0.03	76	0.03	48	0.06	80	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		83	0.34	89	0.00	83	0.03	86	0.03	45	0.06	81	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		87	0.29	70	0.00	86	0.03	87	0.03	69	0.04	88	0.03
Rossi 2007		76	0.43	71	0.00	82	0.03	77	0.03	57	0.05	74	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		29	0.58	37	0.00	26	0.07	29	0.29	24	0.36	26	0.32
Rubinstein 1952		15	0.62	2	0.18	2	0.27	6	0.62	6	0.63	3	0.62
Rubinstein 1966		1	0.71	1	0.22	1	0.22	2	0.75	5	0.65	2	0.70
Schilhawsky 1960		42	0.54	28	0.00	40	0.06	38	0.19	36	0.20	39	0.19
Shebanova 2002		5	0.65	6	0.07	4	0.19	3	0.70	10	0.54	4	0.61
Smith 1975		43	0.54	54	0.00	48	0.05	55	0.05	36	0.21	50	0.10
Sokolov 2002		63	0.49	55	0.00	54	0.06	50	0.06	56	0.05	66	0.05
Sztompka 1959		32	0.57	39	0.00	36	0.06	33	0.23	68	0.04	51	0.10
Tomsic 1995		55	0.52	80	0.00	33	0.07	41	0.13	13	0.54	34	0.26
Uninsky 1932		72	0.44	59	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	68	0.04	86	0.03
Uninsky 1971		67	0.46	60	0.00	64	0.04	67	0.04	51	0.06	68	0.05
Wasowski 1980		34	0.57	23	0.00	41	0.06	39	0.18	44	0.11	42	0.14
Zak 1937		13	0.63	7	0.07	9	0.11	12	0.52	26	0.38	14	0.44
Zak 1951		12	0.63	25	0.00	10	0.20	8	0.57	24	0.41	9	0.48
Random 1		90	-0.17	40	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	89	0.01	90	0.01
Random 2		88	-0.04	84	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	68	0.03	89	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.11	90	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	60	0.04	87	0.03

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).