Rubinstein 1966

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		47	0.60	44	0.00	57	0.05	53	0.05	66	0.04	66	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		25	0.67	53	0.00	43	0.12	38	0.24	60	0.04	40	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		43	0.61	48	0.00	47	0.04	65	0.04	71	0.04	70	0.04
Bacha 2000		24	0.67	23	0.01	29	0.05	21	0.37	31	0.15	24	0.24
Badura 1965		67	0.46	49	0.00	82	0.04	81	0.04	65	0.04	68	0.04
Barbosa 1983		23	0.67	29	0.00	15	0.08	15	0.42	6	0.49	7	0.45
Biret 1990		9	0.72	34	0.00	18	0.08	19	0.39	30	0.20	21	0.28
Blet 2003		32	0.64	65	0.00	23	0.07	17	0.40	31	0.22	17	0.30
Block 1995		76	0.42	31	0.00	14	0.07	43	0.17	54	0.05	43	0.09
Blumental 1952		20	0.68	76	0.00	24	0.07	27	0.33	43	0.09	33	0.17
Boshniakovich 1969		65	0.46	45	0.00	60	0.04	78	0.04	76	0.04	69	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		19	0.69	89	0.00	35	0.06	32	0.29	25	0.28	18	0.28
Bunin 1987		87	0.19	54	0.00	88	0.03	83	0.03	81	0.02	90	0.02
Bunin 1987b		88	0.17	72	0.00	87	0.03	84	0.03	84	0.02	87	0.02
Chiu 1999		17	0.70	5	0.02	16	0.10	20	0.38	19	0.29	14	0.33
Cohen 1997		37	0.62	20	0.01	21	0.06	24	0.36	9	0.44	8	0.40
Cortot 1951		55	0.55	86	0.00	63	0.06	46	0.06	81	0.03	71	0.04
Csalog 1996		72	0.44	21	0.01	28	0.06	39	0.23	20	0.34	20	0.28
Czerny 1949		63	0.47	58	0.00	69	0.04	72	0.04	76	0.03	83	0.03
Czerny 1990		8	0.72	6	0.01	32	0.07	25	0.36	66	0.03	41	0.10
Duchoud 2007		77	0.42	77	0.00	76	0.04	62	0.04	75	0.03	84	0.03
Ezaki 2006		14	0.70	59	0.00	42	0.10	40	0.22	45	0.08	36	0.13
Falvay 1989		46	0.60	13	0.01	31	0.07	41	0.19	27	0.42	19	0.28
Farrell 1958		6	0.74	35	0.00	6	0.09	10	0.46	16	0.45	6	0.45
Ferenczy 1958		68	0.46	73	0.00	77	0.04	80	0.04	84	0.03	81	0.03
Fliere 1977		21	0.68	38	0.00	40	0.09	29	0.31	70	0.04	37	0.11
Fou 1978		31	0.65	14	0.01	19	0.07	18	0.40	41	0.11	28	0.21
Francois 1956		53	0.56	79	0.00	54	0.04	71	0.04	52	0.05	72	0.04
Friedman 1923		38	0.62	24	0.00	51	0.05	49	0.05	65	0.04	74	0.04
Friedman 1923b		41	0.62	28	0.00	50	0.05	55	0.05	67	0.05	52	0.05
Friedman 1930		45	0.60	52	0.00	61	0.04	73	0.04	59	0.05	65	0.04
Garcia 2007		56	0.55	69	0.00	59	0.04	66	0.04	63	0.04	67	0.04
Garcia 2007b		60	0.50	68	0.00	67	0.04	77	0.04	78	0.04	73	0.04
Gierzod 1998		44	0.60	17	0.01	44	0.07	44	0.13	67	0.04	48	0.07
Gornostaeva 1994		61	0.49	80	0.00	66	0.04	76	0.04	80	0.03	86	0.03
Groot 1988		26	0.67	4	0.02	13	0.08	4	0.53	7	0.51	3	0.52
Harasiewicz 1955		54	0.56	81	0.00	64	0.04	64	0.04	44	0.09	51	0.06
Hatto 1993		18	0.69	18	0.01	34	0.06	33	0.27	43	0.12	32	0.18
Hatto 1997		12	0.71	16	0.01	38	0.07	34	0.27	44	0.12	31	0.18
Horowitz 1949		70	0.44	42	0.00	70	0.04	68	0.04	68	0.04	60	0.04
Indjic 1988		13	0.70	40	0.00	39	0.08	37	0.27	44	0.12	30	0.18
Kapell 1951		57	0.54	39	0.00	36	0.07	36	0.27	77	0.03	42	0.09
Kissin 1993		42	0.61	26	0.00	26	0.05	26	0.35	42	0.10	29	0.19
Kushner 1989		16	0.70	12	0.01	17	0.08	14	0.46	43	0.11	27	0.22
Luisada 1991		4	0.74	36	0.00	7	0.10	9	0.49	32	0.21	16	0.32
Lushtak 2004		2	0.77	32	0.00	3	0.16	13	0.46	14	0.31	10	0.38
Malcuzynski 1961		85	0.26	25	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	63	0.04	76	0.03
Magaloff 1978		29	0.66	64	0.00	33	0.07	31	0.29	30	0.24	22	0.26
Magin 1975		64	0.47	22	0.01	58	0.05	52	0.05	83	0.03	59	0.04
Michalowski 1933		83	0.31	82	0.00	85	0.03	85	0.03	84	0.03	79	0.03
Milkina 1970		28	0.66	9	0.01	12	0.10	11	0.46	31	0.26	12	0.35
Mohovich 1999		5	0.74	15	0.01	5	0.09	8	0.51	16	0.47	4	0.49
Moravec 1969		75	0.42	70	0.00	78	0.04	79	0.04	42	0.13	46	0.07
Morozova 2008		30	0.65	46	0.00	37	0.07	35	0.27	43	0.10	34	0.16
Neighaus 1950		48	0.59	30	0.00	49	0.05	50	0.05	60	0.05	54	0.05
Niedzielski 1931		58	0.52	50	0.00	62	0.05	58	0.05	68	0.03	58	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		39	0.62	10	0.01	46	0.05	51	0.05	83	0.03	63	0.04
Osinska 1989		10	0.72	41	0.00	10	0.08	7	0.51	33	0.23	13	0.34
Pachmann 1927		66	0.46	87	0.00	83	0.04	82	0.04	77	0.03	77	0.03
Paderewski 1930		52	0.56	61	0.00	55	0.06	48	0.06	82	0.03	62	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		22	0.68	55	0.00	27	0.07	23	0.36	40	0.14	26	0.22
Pierdomenico 2008		74	0.43	60	0.00	52	0.05	60	0.05	46	0.08	50	0.06
Poblocka 1999		80	0.37	19	0.01	71	0.04	67	0.04	70	0.04	57	0.04
Rabcewiczowa 1932		40	0.62	83	0.00	30	0.06	30	0.30	56	0.04	38	0.11
Rachmaninoff 1923		35	0.63	8	0.01	45	0.05	45	0.11	68	0.04	47	0.07
Rangell 2001		82	0.32	33	0.00	53	0.06	47	0.06	59	0.04	53	0.05
Richter 1976		86	0.25	71	0.00	86	0.04	69	0.04	69	0.04	61	0.04
Rosen 1989		34	0.63	47	0.00	22	0.06	16	0.41	37	0.14	25	0.24
Rosenthal 1930		81	0.36	75	0.00	79	0.04	75	0.04	78	0.03	85	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		69	0.45	91	0.00	72	0.05	61	0.05	43	0.13	44	0.08
Rosenthal 1931b		71	0.44	66	0.00	74	0.05	59	0.05	52	0.06	55	0.05
Rosenthal 1931c		78	0.42	27	0.00	73	0.04	70	0.04	43	0.13	49	0.07
Rosenthal 1931d		73	0.43	88	0.00	75	0.05	57	0.05	41	0.13	45	0.08
Rossi 2007		36	0.62	62	0.00	25	0.05	42	0.18	18	0.35	23	0.25
Rubinstein 1939		1	0.85	1	0.39	1	0.38	1	0.67	1	0.68	1	0.67
Rubinstein 1952		15	0.70	2	0.22	2	0.41	2	0.59	2	0.61	2	0.60
Rubinstein 1966		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Schilhawsky 1960		59	0.51	56	0.00	65	0.05	54	0.05	67	0.04	64	0.04
Shebanova 2002		33	0.64	37	0.00	41	0.09	28	0.33	70	0.04	39	0.11
Smith 1975		27	0.66	51	0.00	20	0.06	12	0.46	24	0.24	15	0.33
Sokolov 2002		62	0.48	63	0.00	68	0.04	63	0.04	88	0.02	75	0.03
Sztompka 1959		49	0.59	90	0.00	48	0.04	74	0.04	83	0.03	78	0.03
Tomsic 1995		51	0.58	43	0.00	11	0.07	22	0.37	6	0.60	5	0.47
Uninsky 1932		79	0.39	74	0.00	80	0.03	87	0.03	77	0.03	82	0.03
Uninsky 1971		84	0.31	84	0.00	81	0.03	88	0.03	74	0.04	80	0.03
Wasowski 1980		50	0.58	57	0.00	56	0.05	56	0.05	72	0.04	56	0.04
Zak 1937		7	0.72	7	0.01	9	0.12	5	0.53	24	0.25	11	0.36
Zak 1951		11	0.71	11	0.01	8	0.11	6	0.53	23	0.27	9	0.38
Average		3	0.75	3	0.09	4	0.10	3	0.56	66	0.04	35	0.15
Random 1		91	-0.26	67	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	84	0.02	91	0.01
Random 2		89	-0.06	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	59	0.03	88	0.02
Random 3		90	-0.18	78	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).