Farrell 1958

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		18	0.71	8	0.02	32	0.08	28	0.30	66	0.04	40	0.11
Anderszewski 2003		28	0.67	49	0.00	24	0.09	31	0.27	41	0.16	34	0.21
Ashkenazy 1981		31	0.66	26	0.00	52	0.05	56	0.05	64	0.04	76	0.04
Bacha 2000		27	0.67	21	0.01	28	0.08	34	0.22	12	0.39	29	0.29
Badura 1965		66	0.51	74	0.00	84	0.05	63	0.05	73	0.04	75	0.04
Barbosa 1983		43	0.64	39	0.00	33	0.06	39	0.17	16	0.33	32	0.24
Biret 1990		2	0.75	2	0.11	2	0.31	3	0.58	4	0.57	4	0.57
Blet 2003		62	0.55	47	0.00	58	0.05	58	0.05	54	0.06	60	0.05
Block 1995		63	0.54	56	0.00	37	0.05	38	0.18	23	0.23	35	0.20
Blumental 1952		16	0.71	81	0.00	26	0.07	14	0.45	27	0.18	30	0.28
Boshniakovich 1969		65	0.52	45	0.00	63	0.04	65	0.04	47	0.07	64	0.05
Brailowsky 1960		25	0.67	82	0.00	31	0.07	30	0.28	8	0.46	22	0.36
Bunin 1987		86	0.25	60	0.00	87	0.04	75	0.04	73	0.04	77	0.04
Bunin 1987b		87	0.25	71	0.00	86	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03
Chiu 1999		14	0.71	72	0.00	42	0.07	40	0.17	19	0.28	33	0.22
Cohen 1997		56	0.57	61	0.00	76	0.04	69	0.04	20	0.31	41	0.11
Cortot 1951		52	0.61	27	0.00	55	0.05	59	0.05	32	0.22	45	0.10
Csalog 1996		85	0.31	86	0.00	78	0.04	77	0.04	53	0.04	71	0.04
Czerny 1949		61	0.55	11	0.02	50	0.05	57	0.05	68	0.04	74	0.04
Czerny 1990		6	0.73	10	0.02	5	0.11	4	0.55	16	0.36	13	0.44
Duchoud 2007		67	0.51	51	0.00	72	0.03	83	0.03	44	0.10	63	0.05
Ezaki 2006		5	0.74	7	0.03	21	0.07	21	0.39	32	0.21	28	0.29
Falvay 1989		23	0.68	22	0.01	30	0.06	32	0.26	4	0.56	21	0.38
Farrell 1958		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ferenczy 1958		74	0.46	87	0.00	82	0.04	68	0.04	82	0.03	85	0.03
Fliere 1977		33	0.65	23	0.01	47	0.12	44	0.12	65	0.04	53	0.07
Fou 1978		13	0.71	59	0.00	14	0.08	8	0.51	21	0.33	15	0.41
Francois 1956		37	0.65	15	0.01	17	0.08	25	0.33	12	0.47	20	0.39
Friedman 1923		45	0.63	53	0.00	68	0.06	55	0.06	77	0.03	79	0.04
Friedman 1923b		44	0.64	40	0.00	67	0.04	66	0.04	78	0.03	87	0.03
Friedman 1930		49	0.62	37	0.00	66	0.03	84	0.03	60	0.05	73	0.04
Garcia 2007		11	0.72	17	0.01	13	0.07	5	0.53	9	0.52	5	0.52
Garcia 2007b		40	0.65	19	0.01	20	0.07	18	0.43	19	0.41	14	0.42
Gierzod 1998		46	0.63	58	0.00	45	0.09	46	0.09	53	0.05	54	0.07
Gornostaeva 1994		59	0.56	75	0.00	59	0.07	49	0.07	62	0.04	65	0.05
Groot 1988		7	0.73	4	0.07	3	0.13	2	0.59	2	0.62	2	0.60
Harasiewicz 1955		39	0.65	46	0.00	39	0.06	45	0.11	76	0.04	55	0.07
Hatto 1993		32	0.65	73	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	71	0.04	78	0.04
Hatto 1997		36	0.65	55	0.00	62	0.07	48	0.07	71	0.04	61	0.05
Horowitz 1949		69	0.50	78	0.00	70	0.04	74	0.04	64	0.05	67	0.04
Indjic 1988		34	0.65	90	0.00	60	0.05	60	0.05	71	0.04	70	0.04
Kapell 1951		73	0.47	68	0.00	56	0.06	53	0.06	55	0.05	59	0.05
Kissin 1993		41	0.65	44	0.00	29	0.08	27	0.31	52	0.04	39	0.11
Kushner 1989		21	0.68	25	0.01	25	0.08	13	0.48	24	0.33	17	0.40
Luisada 1991		17	0.71	62	0.00	41	0.07	37	0.19	59	0.05	44	0.10
Lushtak 2004		1	0.77	20	0.01	10	0.07	6	0.52	8	0.37	12	0.44
Malcuzynski 1961		72	0.47	50	0.00	69	0.03	87	0.03	58	0.04	82	0.03
Magaloff 1978		10	0.72	32	0.00	4	0.13	10	0.50	1	0.65	3	0.57
Magin 1975		60	0.55	79	0.00	51	0.06	54	0.06	66	0.04	58	0.05
Michalowski 1933		79	0.41	88	0.00	83	0.04	72	0.04	77	0.03	83	0.03
Milkina 1970		22	0.68	80	0.00	16	0.08	12	0.49	16	0.41	10	0.45
Mohovich 1999		19	0.70	70	0.00	6	0.15	9	0.51	16	0.46	9	0.48
Moravec 1969		64	0.54	57	0.00	54	0.05	62	0.05	22	0.40	38	0.14
Morozova 2008		24	0.68	38	0.00	46	0.08	47	0.08	48	0.05	56	0.06
Neighaus 1950		30	0.66	6	0.03	35	0.06	36	0.19	37	0.13	37	0.16
Niedzielski 1931		54	0.59	29	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	79	0.03	66	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		42	0.64	18	0.01	48	0.06	50	0.06	42	0.13	48	0.09
Osinska 1989		3	0.75	1	0.34	1	0.34	1	0.64	3	0.62	1	0.63
Pachmann 1927		70	0.49	30	0.00	80	0.04	70	0.04	46	0.05	69	0.04
Paderewski 1930		51	0.62	69	0.00	34	0.06	26	0.32	16	0.38	24	0.35
Perlemuter 1992		20	0.69	5	0.04	12	0.07	24	0.35	19	0.32	25	0.33
Pierdomenico 2008		58	0.57	9	0.02	22	0.07	22	0.35	1	0.66	8	0.48
Poblocka 1999		76	0.42	35	0.00	71	0.03	82	0.03	77	0.03	80	0.03
Rabcewiczowa 1932		47	0.63	33	0.00	19	0.09	29	0.30	11	0.34	26	0.32
Rachmaninoff 1923		8	0.73	13	0.02	11	0.07	17	0.44	13	0.36	16	0.40
Rangell 2001		82	0.36	41	0.00	38	0.07	43	0.14	29	0.26	36	0.19
Richter 1976		84	0.34	31	0.00	85	0.04	73	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.04
Rosen 1989		48	0.62	89	0.00	40	0.06	35	0.20	68	0.04	50	0.09
Rosenthal 1930		80	0.39	83	0.00	77	0.03	81	0.03	81	0.03	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		78	0.41	36	0.00	74	0.03	85	0.03	25	0.28	49	0.09
Rosenthal 1931b		77	0.42	76	0.00	64	0.04	71	0.04	22	0.28	43	0.11
Rosenthal 1931c		81	0.38	42	0.00	75	0.04	76	0.04	26	0.24	46	0.10
Rosenthal 1931d		75	0.43	84	0.00	73	0.04	79	0.04	22	0.33	42	0.11
Rossi 2007		15	0.71	24	0.01	23	0.09	16	0.44	4	0.56	6	0.50
Rubinstein 1939		9	0.73	43	0.00	8	0.07	11	0.49	6	0.50	7	0.49
Rubinstein 1952		53	0.59	28	0.00	15	0.09	23	0.35	19	0.44	19	0.39
Rubinstein 1966		4	0.74	12	0.02	9	0.07	15	0.45	9	0.46	11	0.45
Schilhawsky 1960		68	0.50	65	0.00	65	0.04	78	0.04	71	0.04	72	0.04
Shebanova 2002		26	0.67	3	0.08	7	0.08	19	0.42	39	0.18	31	0.27
Smith 1975		29	0.66	67	0.00	27	0.07	20	0.40	11	0.39	18	0.39
Sokolov 2002		57	0.57	16	0.01	53	0.06	52	0.06	43	0.11	51	0.08
Sztompka 1959		12	0.72	14	0.01	18	0.08	7	0.52	36	0.17	27	0.30
Tomsic 1995		55	0.59	48	0.00	36	0.05	33	0.23	11	0.53	23	0.35
Uninsky 1932		71	0.48	77	0.00	79	0.05	64	0.05	63	0.05	62	0.05
Uninsky 1971		83	0.34	63	0.00	81	0.03	86	0.03	71	0.04	84	0.03
Wasowski 1980		50	0.62	64	0.00	57	0.05	61	0.05	57	0.06	57	0.05
Zak 1937		38	0.65	34	0.00	43	0.07	41	0.16	56	0.04	52	0.08
Zak 1951		35	0.65	52	0.00	44	0.08	42	0.15	52	0.05	47	0.09
Random 1		90	-0.25	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	64	0.03	89	0.02
Random 2		88	-0.06	66	0.00	88	0.01	88	0.01	48	0.04	88	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.15	54	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	50	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).