Paderewski 1930

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