Niedzielski 1931

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		4	0.76	58	0.00	5	0.14	4	0.54	29	0.29	11	0.40
Anderszewski 2003		31	0.65	41	0.00	38	0.06	42	0.13	54	0.04	53	0.07
Ashkenazy 1981		67	0.52	59	0.00	34	0.06	36	0.22	47	0.06	41	0.11
Bacha 2000		64	0.54	42	0.00	40	0.06	38	0.15	26	0.19	32	0.17
Badura 1965		69	0.52	34	0.00	65	0.03	82	0.03	53	0.06	67	0.04
Barbosa 1983		76	0.47	17	0.01	61	0.04	49	0.04	28	0.19	46	0.09
Biret 1990		62	0.54	36	0.00	43	0.05	43	0.10	48	0.06	49	0.08
Blet 2003		26	0.66	60	0.00	44	0.05	44	0.09	48	0.07	48	0.08
Block 1995		68	0.52	78	0.00	75	0.04	58	0.04	58	0.04	69	0.04
Blumental 1952		52	0.59	10	0.02	17	0.09	28	0.36	25	0.19	29	0.26
Boshniakovich 1969		39	0.63	18	0.01	50	0.03	73	0.03	59	0.05	71	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		44	0.60	25	0.00	51	0.03	76	0.03	30	0.23	47	0.08
Bunin 1987		78	0.43	37	0.00	80	0.04	65	0.04	52	0.06	59	0.05
Bunin 1987b		80	0.42	66	0.00	79	0.03	69	0.03	52	0.06	63	0.04
Chiu 1999		70	0.52	86	0.00	49	0.03	80	0.03	53	0.04	76	0.03
Cohen 1997		87	0.25	47	0.00	84	0.02	87	0.02	65	0.04	85	0.03
Cortot 1951		11	0.72	35	0.00	28	0.10	30	0.31	9	0.48	13	0.39
Csalog 1996		77	0.46	64	0.00	73	0.03	70	0.03	52	0.04	81	0.03
Czerny 1949		2	0.81	6	0.05	3	0.22	2	0.64	16	0.51	3	0.57
Czerny 1990		1	0.82	1	0.28	1	0.27	1	0.68	4	0.54	1	0.61
Duchoud 2007		83	0.39	23	0.01	82	0.04	50	0.04	68	0.03	82	0.03
Ezaki 2006		20	0.69	74	0.00	23	0.09	20	0.44	24	0.32	14	0.38
Falvay 1989		84	0.39	72	0.00	86	0.03	75	0.03	71	0.04	77	0.03
Farrell 1958		50	0.59	61	0.00	47	0.03	79	0.03	51	0.06	60	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		24	0.67	75	0.00	33	0.05	33	0.26	15	0.37	23	0.31
Fliere 1977		3	0.77	22	0.01	14	0.11	12	0.49	39	0.15	28	0.27
Fou 1978		75	0.50	80	0.00	72	0.03	81	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03
Francois 1956		29	0.65	13	0.01	37	0.06	35	0.23	19	0.42	26	0.31
Friedman 1923		10	0.74	32	0.00	8	0.11	8	0.50	14	0.50	7	0.50
Friedman 1923b		8	0.75	9	0.02	6	0.16	7	0.51	16	0.50	6	0.50
Friedman 1930		6	0.75	14	0.01	13	0.12	13	0.49	11	0.51	5	0.50
Garcia 2007		23	0.67	11	0.02	20	0.08	25	0.38	26	0.32	18	0.35
Garcia 2007b		37	0.64	30	0.00	25	0.13	27	0.37	21	0.37	16	0.37
Gierzod 1998		9	0.74	3	0.11	4	0.18	5	0.54	14	0.44	8	0.49
Gornostaeva 1994		41	0.62	33	0.00	55	0.04	53	0.04	52	0.05	72	0.04
Groot 1988		73	0.50	26	0.00	74	0.04	63	0.04	61	0.05	73	0.04
Harasiewicz 1955		40	0.63	79	0.00	48	0.03	74	0.03	74	0.04	87	0.03
Hatto 1993		38	0.64	12	0.02	29	0.09	19	0.45	33	0.22	25	0.31
Hatto 1997		34	0.65	81	0.00	30	0.15	18	0.46	32	0.23	21	0.33
Horowitz 1949		58	0.56	21	0.01	70	0.03	71	0.03	52	0.07	55	0.05
Indjic 1988		32	0.65	82	0.00	27	0.11	16	0.46	32	0.24	20	0.33
Kapell 1951		21	0.68	27	0.00	15	0.10	11	0.49	36	0.12	30	0.24
Kissin 1993		19	0.70	87	0.00	18	0.09	21	0.43	29	0.24	22	0.32
Kushner 1989		33	0.65	48	0.00	56	0.04	56	0.04	70	0.04	61	0.04
Luisada 1991		25	0.67	15	0.01	26	0.12	23	0.41	65	0.04	34	0.13
Lushtak 2004		53	0.58	83	0.00	60	0.04	60	0.04	67	0.04	68	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		43	0.61	16	0.01	19	0.09	37	0.18	17	0.30	31	0.23
Magaloff 1978		55	0.57	24	0.01	52	0.04	64	0.04	30	0.23	45	0.10
Magin 1975		27	0.66	62	0.00	32	0.06	32	0.26	45	0.07	35	0.13
Michalowski 1933		48	0.59	39	0.00	59	0.04	57	0.04	49	0.06	57	0.05
Milkina 1970		47	0.59	89	0.00	62	0.05	48	0.05	85	0.03	62	0.04
Mohovich 1999		56	0.57	76	0.00	54	0.05	45	0.05	57	0.06	58	0.05
Moravec 1969		28	0.66	5	0.06	11	0.10	26	0.37	1	0.68	4	0.50
Morozova 2008		51	0.59	67	0.00	58	0.04	51	0.04	56	0.04	66	0.04
Neighaus 1950		13	0.71	8	0.02	12	0.09	17	0.46	28	0.31	15	0.38
Niedzielski 1931		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ohlsson 1999		54	0.58	19	0.01	53	0.04	52	0.04	75	0.03	80	0.03
Osinska 1989		15	0.71	84	0.00	24	0.10	22	0.43	36	0.20	27	0.29
Pachmann 1927		72	0.51	55	0.00	85	0.03	85	0.03	85	0.02	88	0.02
Paderewski 1930		46	0.60	31	0.00	57	0.04	54	0.04	39	0.13	52	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		49	0.59	40	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.13	60	0.04	50	0.07
Pierdomenico 2008		81	0.40	49	0.00	78	0.04	59	0.04	56	0.06	54	0.05
Poblocka 1999		22	0.68	77	0.00	36	0.08	34	0.25	62	0.05	38	0.11
Rabcewiczowa 1932		45	0.60	54	0.00	41	0.05	40	0.14	56	0.04	51	0.07
Rachmaninoff 1923		17	0.70	7	0.02	9	0.10	6	0.52	12	0.37	10	0.44
Rangell 2001		86	0.29	85	0.00	83	0.03	86	0.03	63	0.03	86	0.03
Richter 1976		74	0.50	44	0.00	81	0.05	47	0.05	50	0.06	56	0.05
Rosen 1989		42	0.62	52	0.00	45	0.05	46	0.05	67	0.04	70	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		57	0.56	29	0.00	68	0.03	83	0.03	58	0.04	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		60	0.54	56	0.00	46	0.03	78	0.03	14	0.44	40	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		63	0.54	88	0.00	67	0.03	84	0.03	15	0.44	42	0.11
Rosenthal 1931c		59	0.54	63	0.00	69	0.03	68	0.03	15	0.38	43	0.11
Rosenthal 1931d		66	0.53	45	0.00	71	0.04	66	0.04	19	0.37	37	0.12
Rossi 2007		65	0.53	20	0.01	63	0.03	77	0.03	23	0.31	44	0.10
Rubinstein 1939		61	0.54	53	0.00	64	0.03	72	0.03	61	0.04	78	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		85	0.38	90	0.00	77	0.04	62	0.04	63	0.05	74	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		71	0.52	46	0.00	76	0.04	67	0.04	57	0.05	65	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		7	0.75	4	0.08	7	0.15	9	0.50	16	0.47	9	0.48
Shebanova 2002		12	0.72	28	0.00	16	0.09	14	0.48	37	0.20	24	0.31
Smith 1975		35	0.64	43	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.15	37	0.14	33	0.14
Sokolov 2002		79	0.43	50	0.00	66	0.04	55	0.04	86	0.02	75	0.03
Sztompka 1959		14	0.71	38	0.00	10	0.10	10	0.50	33	0.23	19	0.34
Tomsic 1995		82	0.40	65	0.00	87	0.04	61	0.04	64	0.05	64	0.04
Uninsky 1932		5	0.76	2	0.13	2	0.18	3	0.61	2	0.56	2	0.58
Uninsky 1971		16	0.70	68	0.00	22	0.09	24	0.40	35	0.32	17	0.36
Wasowski 1980		18	0.70	57	0.00	21	0.09	15	0.48	15	0.32	12	0.39
Zak 1937		30	0.65	51	0.00	31	0.05	29	0.31	62	0.04	39	0.11
Zak 1951		36	0.64	69	0.00	35	0.06	31	0.28	48	0.06	36	0.13
Random 1		88	-0.18	70	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	46	0.06	84	0.03
Random 2		90	-0.27	71	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	81	0.02	89	0.01
Random 3		89	-0.21	73	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	80	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).