Morozova 2008

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		3	0.80	9	0.03	8	0.14	9	0.47	25	0.33	13	0.39
Anderszewski 2003		35	0.68	74	0.00	38	0.09	33	0.20	38	0.19	36	0.19
Ashkenazy 1981		11	0.78	1	0.26	1	0.26	4	0.55	3	0.54	2	0.54
Bacha 2000		71	0.50	88	0.00	68	0.04	55	0.04	76	0.03	79	0.03
Badura 1965		16	0.75	4	0.07	17	0.09	16	0.40	3	0.61	6	0.49
Barbosa 1983		65	0.55	19	0.01	69	0.06	45	0.06	40	0.11	53	0.08
Biret 1990		53	0.61	37	0.00	49	0.04	64	0.04	46	0.07	66	0.05
Blet 2003		38	0.67	49	0.00	31	0.06	34	0.19	27	0.28	28	0.23
Block 1995		57	0.59	56	0.00	46	0.05	46	0.05	31	0.16	49	0.09
Blumental 1952		52	0.63	30	0.00	56	0.04	71	0.04	52	0.05	75	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		31	0.69	34	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.19	31	0.28	30	0.23
Brailowsky 1960		64	0.55	86	0.00	65	0.05	50	0.05	45	0.06	61	0.05
Bunin 1987		75	0.45	61	0.00	77	0.03	75	0.03	45	0.08	65	0.05
Bunin 1987b		76	0.45	65	0.00	76	0.04	70	0.04	45	0.09	60	0.06
Chiu 1999		34	0.68	28	0.00	36	0.05	38	0.16	21	0.26	32	0.20
Cohen 1997		84	0.38	57	0.00	81	0.02	88	0.02	61	0.04	84	0.03
Cortot 1951		54	0.61	58	0.00	59	0.04	54	0.04	48	0.05	77	0.04
Csalog 1996		80	0.40	32	0.00	74	0.03	72	0.03	54	0.04	83	0.03
Czerny 1949		51	0.63	18	0.01	29	0.06	29	0.24	44	0.12	38	0.17
Czerny 1990		23	0.71	46	0.00	32	0.06	25	0.29	34	0.15	31	0.21
Duchoud 2007		63	0.56	25	0.00	57	0.04	68	0.04	19	0.28	46	0.11
Ezaki 2006		12	0.77	68	0.00	18	0.09	28	0.24	30	0.22	27	0.23
Falvay 1989		77	0.45	69	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	60	0.05	70	0.04
Farrell 1958		36	0.68	14	0.01	45	0.05	48	0.05	47	0.08	59	0.06
Ferenczy 1958		66	0.55	71	0.00	78	0.05	51	0.05	65	0.04	74	0.04
Fliere 1977		5	0.79	7	0.03	6	0.11	7	0.50	23	0.31	12	0.39
Fou 1978		14	0.75	8	0.03	11	0.11	10	0.46	13	0.41	7	0.43
Francois 1956		68	0.51	41	0.00	67	0.04	57	0.04	37	0.14	58	0.07
Friedman 1923		21	0.73	50	0.00	35	0.05	32	0.22	31	0.37	24	0.29
Friedman 1923b		18	0.74	45	0.00	33	0.05	31	0.23	30	0.37	23	0.29
Friedman 1930		29	0.70	72	0.00	42	0.06	39	0.14	36	0.30	33	0.20
Garcia 2007		27	0.70	76	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.13	40	0.15	43	0.14
Garcia 2007b		44	0.65	83	0.00	48	0.04	60	0.04	62	0.04	78	0.04
Gierzod 1998		25	0.71	20	0.01	20	0.11	14	0.42	33	0.23	22	0.31
Gornostaeva 1994		67	0.51	23	0.01	71	0.04	69	0.04	66	0.03	85	0.03
Groot 1988		61	0.57	26	0.00	51	0.04	66	0.04	52	0.06	67	0.05
Harasiewicz 1955		15	0.75	82	0.00	22	0.06	26	0.27	36	0.13	37	0.19
Hatto 1993		9	0.79	66	0.00	13	0.10	13	0.43	17	0.38	11	0.40
Hatto 1997		6	0.79	39	0.00	9	0.12	12	0.44	18	0.38	8	0.41
Horowitz 1949		43	0.65	40	0.00	53	0.03	80	0.03	42	0.19	51	0.08
Indjic 1988		8	0.79	43	0.00	12	0.09	11	0.44	18	0.37	9	0.40
Kapell 1951		46	0.64	24	0.01	23	0.06	23	0.31	44	0.07	40	0.15
Kissin 1993		2	0.81	17	0.01	4	0.15	2	0.56	12	0.48	4	0.52
Kushner 1989		13	0.76	2	0.12	2	0.13	5	0.52	9	0.52	3	0.52
Luisada 1991		1	0.84	3	0.10	3	0.12	3	0.55	4	0.48	5	0.51
Lushtak 2004		19	0.73	21	0.01	21	0.08	22	0.35	15	0.30	20	0.32
Malcuzynski 1961		79	0.41	52	0.00	79	0.03	79	0.03	64	0.04	82	0.03
Magaloff 1978		72	0.50	81	0.00	70	0.05	52	0.05	55	0.05	62	0.05
Magin 1975		10	0.78	12	0.02	5	0.16	1	0.57	4	0.54	1	0.55
Michalowski 1933		60	0.57	62	0.00	63	0.04	63	0.04	46	0.07	63	0.05
Milkina 1970		40	0.66	13	0.01	27	0.05	36	0.18	34	0.20	35	0.19
Mohovich 1999		45	0.65	51	0.00	50	0.05	47	0.05	42	0.13	54	0.08
Moravec 1969		83	0.38	77	0.00	87	0.04	65	0.04	78	0.03	80	0.03
Morozova 2008		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Neighaus 1950		50	0.63	27	0.00	39	0.05	41	0.13	77	0.04	57	0.07
Niedzielski 1931		59	0.59	63	0.00	64	0.04	56	0.04	51	0.04	72	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		33	0.68	42	0.00	19	0.09	21	0.35	20	0.37	16	0.36
Osinska 1989		41	0.65	35	0.00	47	0.04	58	0.04	58	0.04	69	0.04
Pachmann 1927		56	0.60	90	0.00	60	0.04	53	0.04	4	0.47	42	0.14
Paderewski 1930		58	0.59	67	0.00	61	0.04	61	0.04	32	0.15	52	0.08
Perlemuter 1992		28	0.70	54	0.00	25	0.06	24	0.29	27	0.24	25	0.26
Pierdomenico 2008		70	0.51	78	0.00	66	0.04	59	0.04	34	0.25	47	0.10
Poblocka 1999		37	0.67	11	0.03	28	0.05	27	0.27	34	0.23	26	0.25
Rabcewiczowa 1932		48	0.64	33	0.00	34	0.05	37	0.17	29	0.21	34	0.19
Rachmaninoff 1923		30	0.69	31	0.00	24	0.06	20	0.35	22	0.31	18	0.33
Rangell 2001		87	0.35	15	0.01	72	0.03	77	0.03	56	0.04	86	0.03
Richter 1976		49	0.64	53	0.00	54	0.04	62	0.04	30	0.38	45	0.12
Rosen 1989		24	0.71	6	0.04	10	0.10	15	0.41	20	0.35	15	0.38
Rosenthal 1930		74	0.46	47	0.00	73	0.03	78	0.03	45	0.07	64	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		81	0.40	79	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	55	0.05	73	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		82	0.39	59	0.00	83	0.03	84	0.03	70	0.04	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		86	0.37	44	0.00	82	0.02	87	0.02	59	0.04	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		85	0.38	73	0.00	84	0.03	81	0.03	50	0.06	76	0.04
Rossi 2007		78	0.44	84	0.00	85	0.02	86	0.02	65	0.05	81	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		39	0.66	29	0.00	52	0.03	74	0.03	34	0.17	56	0.07
Rubinstein 1952		69	0.51	16	0.01	43	0.04	44	0.09	42	0.18	44	0.13
Rubinstein 1966		42	0.65	48	0.00	44	0.05	42	0.10	34	0.27	39	0.16
Schilhawsky 1960		22	0.72	60	0.00	26	0.07	19	0.36	36	0.33	17	0.34
Shebanova 2002		20	0.73	5	0.05	7	0.12	6	0.51	26	0.32	10	0.40
Smith 1975		55	0.60	38	0.00	62	0.05	49	0.05	63	0.04	71	0.04
Sokolov 2002		62	0.56	55	0.00	58	0.04	67	0.04	40	0.13	55	0.07
Sztompka 1959		17	0.74	10	0.03	16	0.11	8	0.48	27	0.30	14	0.38
Tomsic 1995		73	0.49	36	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	37	0.20	50	0.08
Uninsky 1932		26	0.71	22	0.01	30	0.05	30	0.23	38	0.24	29	0.23
Uninsky 1971		47	0.64	75	0.00	40	0.05	43	0.09	38	0.26	41	0.15
Wasowski 1980		32	0.69	70	0.00	55	0.03	73	0.03	64	0.05	68	0.04
Zak 1937		7	0.79	64	0.00	15	0.11	18	0.38	22	0.25	21	0.31
Zak 1951		4	0.79	89	0.00	14	0.10	17	0.39	21	0.27	19	0.32
Random 1		90	-0.26	80	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	81	0.02	89	0.01
Random 2		88	0.06	87	0.00	88	0.02	85	0.02	3	0.53	48	0.10
Random 3		89	-0.25	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	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).