Garcia 2007

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	0.80	90	0.00	5	0.14	5	0.56	34	0.27	12	0.39
Anderszewski 2003		46	0.66	13	0.00	47	0.08	46	0.08	44	0.12	45	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		32	0.68	42	0.00	46	0.07	48	0.07	74	0.04	64	0.05
Bacha 2000		61	0.59	27	0.00	58	0.04	62	0.04	69	0.04	67	0.04
Badura 1965		66	0.57	79	0.00	72	0.03	80	0.03	49	0.07	63	0.05
Barbosa 1983		86	0.44	67	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03
Biret 1990		12	0.73	81	0.00	9	0.10	9	0.54	10	0.51	5	0.52
Blet 2003		24	0.70	36	0.00	31	0.06	29	0.27	16	0.37	20	0.32
Block 1995		72	0.54	53	0.00	35	0.06	42	0.15	78	0.03	54	0.07
Blumental 1952		27	0.70	50	0.00	33	0.05	33	0.23	35	0.13	36	0.17
Boshniakovich 1969		33	0.68	24	0.00	38	0.06	44	0.13	56	0.05	50	0.08
Brailowsky 1960		69	0.55	43	0.00	64	0.03	75	0.03	71	0.04	80	0.03
Bunin 1987		81	0.46	33	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	50	0.07	75	0.04
Bunin 1987b		82	0.45	83	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	48	0.07	72	0.04
Chiu 1999		60	0.59	28	0.00	60	0.05	57	0.05	81	0.03	68	0.04
Cohen 1997		87	0.44	7	0.01	81	0.03	82	0.03	31	0.26	48	0.09
Cortot 1951		9	0.75	5	0.02	19	0.08	17	0.45	8	0.51	7	0.48
Csalog 1996		83	0.45	29	0.00	80	0.02	84	0.02	64	0.03	88	0.02
Czerny 1949		23	0.70	19	0.00	18	0.08	21	0.37	40	0.28	21	0.32
Czerny 1990		30	0.69	91	0.00	36	0.06	38	0.18	54	0.04	51	0.08
Duchoud 2007		47	0.66	21	0.00	34	0.06	43	0.14	10	0.41	30	0.24
Ezaki 2006		38	0.67	82	0.00	57	0.07	49	0.07	78	0.03	57	0.05
Falvay 1989		80	0.46	46	0.00	88	0.04	64	0.04	65	0.05	70	0.04
Farrell 1958		18	0.72	10	0.01	10	0.10	10	0.52	6	0.53	3	0.52
Ferenczy 1958		59	0.60	68	0.00	59	0.05	61	0.05	58	0.05	62	0.05
Fliere 1977		5	0.78	74	0.00	6	0.12	6	0.56	28	0.26	13	0.38
Fou 1978		6	0.77	34	0.00	7	0.17	7	0.54	13	0.42	6	0.48
Francois 1956		52	0.62	80	0.00	50	0.06	52	0.06	27	0.28	41	0.13
Friedman 1923		53	0.62	51	0.00	68	0.06	54	0.06	70	0.04	66	0.05
Friedman 1923b		54	0.62	75	0.00	67	0.04	68	0.04	74	0.04	76	0.04
Friedman 1930		55	0.62	32	0.00	69	0.03	72	0.03	71	0.04	85	0.03
Garcia 2007		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Garcia 2007b		1	0.91	1	0.78	1	0.77	1	0.84	1	0.84	1	0.84
Gierzod 1998		10	0.75	26	0.00	16	0.11	13	0.47	38	0.18	25	0.29
Gornostaeva 1994		57	0.61	39	0.00	61	0.05	58	0.05	55	0.05	65	0.05
Groot 1988		62	0.58	30	0.00	25	0.07	37	0.19	50	0.06	44	0.11
Harasiewicz 1955		20	0.71	35	0.00	20	0.09	19	0.38	47	0.06	39	0.15
Hatto 1993		44	0.67	69	0.00	42	0.06	36	0.20	38	0.17	35	0.18
Hatto 1997		35	0.68	84	0.00	40	0.05	31	0.23	39	0.17	33	0.20
Horowitz 1949		43	0.67	44	0.00	54	0.06	50	0.06	42	0.24	42	0.12
Indjic 1988		34	0.68	64	0.00	41	0.08	32	0.23	38	0.18	32	0.20
Kapell 1951		28	0.69	15	0.00	15	0.09	14	0.46	33	0.14	29	0.25
Kissin 1993		15	0.73	85	0.00	30	0.07	28	0.30	40	0.12	34	0.19
Kushner 1989		29	0.69	47	0.00	26	0.06	24	0.35	30	0.30	19	0.32
Luisada 1991		31	0.69	89	0.00	48	0.06	51	0.06	62	0.05	58	0.05
Lushtak 2004		39	0.67	31	0.00	39	0.06	39	0.17	39	0.13	38	0.15
Malcuzynski 1961		65	0.57	18	0.00	53	0.05	60	0.05	37	0.15	47	0.09
Magaloff 1978		64	0.57	22	0.00	63	0.04	67	0.04	66	0.05	69	0.04
Magin 1975		16	0.73	25	0.00	22	0.09	20	0.38	33	0.22	22	0.29
Michalowski 1933		51	0.63	54	0.00	52	0.05	55	0.05	44	0.11	53	0.07
Milkina 1970		40	0.67	70	0.00	49	0.05	56	0.05	55	0.05	60	0.05
Mohovich 1999		50	0.65	61	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.13	47	0.08	46	0.10
Moravec 1969		70	0.55	8	0.01	74	0.04	66	0.04	38	0.15	49	0.08
Morozova 2008		22	0.70	76	0.00	44	0.07	41	0.15	41	0.13	40	0.14
Neighaus 1950		26	0.70	86	0.00	27	0.06	23	0.35	34	0.20	28	0.26
Niedzielski 1931		41	0.67	3	0.02	23	0.07	27	0.32	26	0.38	16	0.35
Ohlsson 1999		21	0.70	55	0.00	14	0.08	12	0.50	22	0.33	9	0.41
Osinska 1989		8	0.76	56	0.00	8	0.12	8	0.54	22	0.41	8	0.47
Pachmann 1927		75	0.52	59	0.00	86	0.02	88	0.02	58	0.04	82	0.03
Paderewski 1930		37	0.68	16	0.00	43	0.09	34	0.22	19	0.38	23	0.29
Perlemuter 1992		7	0.77	17	0.00	2	0.24	4	0.62	3	0.58	2	0.60
Pierdomenico 2008		74	0.53	9	0.01	24	0.06	40	0.17	16	0.40	26	0.26
Poblocka 1999		36	0.68	72	0.00	21	0.09	22	0.36	30	0.29	18	0.32
Rabcewiczowa 1932		42	0.67	45	0.00	37	0.06	35	0.20	38	0.13	37	0.16
Rachmaninoff 1923		13	0.73	2	0.03	13	0.10	18	0.42	25	0.30	15	0.35
Rangell 2001		88	0.41	65	0.00	82	0.03	74	0.03	50	0.05	77	0.04
Richter 1976		71	0.55	62	0.00	73	0.04	65	0.04	45	0.12	52	0.07
Rosen 1989		19	0.71	66	0.00	29	0.05	26	0.33	34	0.18	31	0.24
Rosenthal 1930		73	0.54	78	0.00	71	0.03	81	0.03	36	0.11	56	0.06
Rosenthal 1931		78	0.47	73	0.00	77	0.03	79	0.03	65	0.04	84	0.03
Rosenthal 1931b		77	0.48	38	0.00	76	0.02	85	0.02	53	0.05	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		79	0.47	20	0.00	78	0.03	70	0.03	56	0.04	87	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		76	0.49	87	0.00	75	0.03	76	0.03	52	0.05	78	0.04
Rossi 2007		67	0.57	11	0.01	65	0.03	77	0.03	40	0.14	55	0.06
Rubinstein 1939		63	0.58	40	0.00	70	0.03	78	0.03	45	0.07	59	0.05
Rubinstein 1952		85	0.44	57	0.00	79	0.03	69	0.03	68	0.05	79	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		68	0.55	6	0.01	62	0.04	63	0.04	66	0.04	74	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		25	0.70	23	0.00	17	0.08	15	0.45	35	0.36	10	0.40
Shebanova 2002		17	0.73	60	0.00	11	0.11	11	0.52	34	0.25	14	0.36
Smith 1975		58	0.60	48	0.00	66	0.03	73	0.03	82	0.03	81	0.03
Sokolov 2002		56	0.62	41	0.00	51	0.06	53	0.06	32	0.20	43	0.11
Sztompka 1959		3	0.82	12	0.01	4	0.33	3	0.65	17	0.41	4	0.52
Tomsic 1995		84	0.44	37	0.00	87	0.03	71	0.03	58	0.06	73	0.04
Uninsky 1932		14	0.73	63	0.00	28	0.06	25	0.34	37	0.25	24	0.29
Uninsky 1971		48	0.66	14	0.00	32	0.06	30	0.25	38	0.28	27	0.26
Wasowski 1980		11	0.74	49	0.00	12	0.11	16	0.45	13	0.33	11	0.39
Zak 1937		45	0.67	88	0.00	55	0.05	59	0.05	67	0.04	71	0.04
Zak 1951		49	0.66	71	0.00	56	0.08	47	0.08	77	0.03	61	0.05
Average		2	0.84	4	0.02	3	0.22	2	0.66	37	0.19	17	0.35
Random 1		91	-0.27	52	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	60	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		89	-0.09	77	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	54	0.03	89	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.19	58	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	57	0.04	91	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).