Bacha 2000

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