Farrell 1958

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		75	0.26	45	0.00	56	0.04	65	0.04	82	0.03	82	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		23	0.45	49	0.00	19	0.10	19	0.49	38	0.26	26	0.36
Ashkenazy 1981		69	0.31	52	0.00	73	0.04	76	0.04	79	0.03	84	0.03
Bacha 2000		24	0.45	51	0.00	21	0.07	21	0.45	3	0.59	13	0.52
Badura 1965		71	0.30	84	0.00	66	0.05	59	0.05	70	0.03	70	0.04
Barbosa 1983		7	0.53	18	0.00	13	0.16	7	0.67	26	0.38	14	0.50
Biret 1990		34	0.43	57	0.00	41	0.07	41	0.20	59	0.05	44	0.10
Blet 2003		86	0.18	73	0.00	86	0.02	85	0.02	78	0.03	89	0.02
Block 1995		56	0.35	82	0.00	65	0.06	50	0.06	57	0.05	61	0.05
Blumental 1952		51	0.37	72	0.00	58	0.04	69	0.04	65	0.05	71	0.04
Boshniakovich 1969		48	0.39	65	0.00	49	0.08	48	0.08	68	0.04	56	0.06
Brailowsky 1960		70	0.31	69	0.00	75	0.04	73	0.04	79	0.03	80	0.03
Bunin 1987		67	0.32	68	0.00	61	0.04	64	0.04	66	0.04	74	0.04
Bunin 1987b		60	0.33	81	0.00	63	0.05	60	0.05	70	0.04	64	0.04
Chiu 1999		63	0.32	74	0.00	62	0.04	75	0.04	59	0.05	62	0.04
Cohen 1997		62	0.32	53	0.00	67	0.04	72	0.04	59	0.04	73	0.04
Cortot 1951		30	0.44	31	0.00	36	0.08	37	0.25	4	0.69	22	0.42
Csalog 1996		68	0.31	86	0.00	64	0.05	54	0.05	75	0.04	66	0.04
Czerny 1949		1	0.61	1	0.56	1	0.55	1	0.79	3	0.77	1	0.78
Czerny 1990		4	0.55	25	0.00	7	0.17	8	0.66	24	0.60	5	0.63
Duchoud 2007		54	0.36	43	0.00	48	0.09	46	0.09	9	0.57	35	0.23
Ezaki 2006		11	0.50	12	0.01	16	0.13	17	0.54	29	0.29	24	0.40
Falvay 1989		32	0.43	9	0.01	43	0.08	42	0.17	58	0.05	45	0.09
Farrell 1958		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Ferenczy 1958		83	0.22	48	0.00	83	0.03	83	0.03	86	0.03	81	0.03
Fliere 1977		40	0.41	37	0.00	20	0.08	23	0.41	55	0.05	42	0.14
Fou 1978		43	0.40	75	0.00	47	0.14	44	0.14	50	0.06	46	0.09
Francois 1956		45	0.39	36	0.00	27	0.06	33	0.32	5	0.55	23	0.42
Friedman 1923		81	0.23	44	0.00	77	0.03	80	0.03	54	0.05	78	0.04
Friedman 1923b		80	0.23	76	0.00	80	0.04	71	0.04	73	0.04	75	0.04
Friedman 1930		76	0.26	58	0.00	81	0.05	58	0.05	72	0.04	67	0.04
Garcia 2007		46	0.39	8	0.01	34	0.07	40	0.22	13	0.51	30	0.33
Garcia 2007b		18	0.47	5	0.03	10	0.17	15	0.56	12	0.58	11	0.57
Gierzod 1998		39	0.42	14	0.01	44	0.08	43	0.16	74	0.04	51	0.08
Gornostaeva 1994		50	0.38	70	0.00	60	0.05	62	0.05	83	0.02	85	0.03
Groot 1988		44	0.40	34	0.00	30	0.06	34	0.29	69	0.04	43	0.11
Harasiewicz 1955		13	0.50	24	0.00	17	0.12	18	0.53	36	0.36	21	0.44
Hatto 1993		20	0.46	30	0.00	26	0.05	24	0.41	43	0.16	33	0.26
Hatto 1997		37	0.42	83	0.00	37	0.07	30	0.34	43	0.09	38	0.17
Horowitz 1949		88	0.06	87	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	88	0.02	90	0.01
Indjic 1988		33	0.43	66	0.00	31	0.08	27	0.39	42	0.16	34	0.25
Kapell 1951		8	0.51	23	0.00	9	0.15	6	0.67	18	0.55	8	0.61
Kissin 1993		22	0.46	19	0.00	23	0.06	29	0.36	37	0.34	27	0.35
Kushner 1989		5	0.55	2	0.13	4	0.36	4	0.72	12	0.57	4	0.64
Luisada 1991		84	0.21	54	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02	87	0.02
Lushtak 2004		9	0.51	7	0.01	11	0.17	13	0.58	21	0.48	12	0.53
Malcuzynski 1961		3	0.55	15	0.01	8	0.21	5	0.71	18	0.52	9	0.61
Magaloff 1978		25	0.45	47	0.00	39	0.08	36	0.28	45	0.09	39	0.16
Magin 1975		29	0.44	38	0.00	40	0.10	35	0.29	41	0.13	36	0.19
Michalowski 1933		85	0.18	71	0.00	82	0.04	78	0.04	55	0.04	65	0.04
Milkina 1970		12	0.50	46	0.00	12	0.16	10	0.63	32	0.32	19	0.45
Mohovich 1999		31	0.43	41	0.00	25	0.07	25	0.40	37	0.19	32	0.28
Moravec 1969		41	0.41	22	0.00	52	0.05	57	0.05	66	0.05	57	0.05
Morozova 2008		26	0.45	28	0.00	35	0.11	28	0.36	26	0.34	28	0.35
Neighaus 1950		52	0.36	32	0.00	68	0.04	66	0.04	40	0.11	53	0.07
Niedzielski 1931		79	0.24	77	0.00	84	0.02	84	0.02	79	0.03	88	0.02
Ohlsson 1999		27	0.44	63	0.00	46	0.09	47	0.09	35	0.27	41	0.16
Osinska 1989		17	0.47	11	0.01	14	0.21	11	0.63	37	0.35	16	0.47
Pachmann 1927		61	0.33	88	0.00	54	0.05	55	0.05	10	0.55	37	0.17
Paderewski 1930		82	0.23	60	0.00	74	0.04	67	0.04	36	0.16	50	0.08
Perlemuter 1992		74	0.27	89	0.00	76	0.04	79	0.04	72	0.03	79	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		57	0.35	50	0.00	29	0.06	31	0.33	7	0.60	20	0.44
Poblocka 1999		19	0.47	29	0.00	24	0.06	32	0.33	37	0.24	31	0.28
Rabcewiczowa 1932		16	0.49	35	0.00	15	0.14	16	0.56	16	0.41	15	0.48
Rachmaninoff 1923		64	0.32	90	0.00	38	0.06	45	0.13	73	0.03	54	0.06
Rangell 2001		10	0.51	6	0.02	6	0.15	12	0.59	5	0.66	7	0.62
Richter 1976		21	0.46	39	0.00	22	0.06	22	0.41	21	0.51	18	0.46
Rosen 1989		53	0.36	55	0.00	55	0.04	63	0.04	74	0.03	83	0.03
Rosenthal 1930		59	0.34	33	0.00	72	0.05	61	0.05	57	0.04	69	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		66	0.32	59	0.00	70	0.04	77	0.04	42	0.11	52	0.07
Rosenthal 1931b		78	0.25	67	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	50	0.05	76	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		72	0.30	27	0.00	71	0.04	74	0.04	61	0.05	77	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		77	0.25	78	0.00	78	0.03	82	0.03	62	0.04	86	0.03
Rossi 2007		55	0.36	16	0.01	33	0.07	38	0.24	7	0.53	25	0.36
Rubinstein 1939		15	0.49	10	0.01	5	0.17	9	0.65	7	0.59	6	0.62
Rubinstein 1952		6	0.53	3	0.05	2	0.20	3	0.74	12	0.58	3	0.66
Rubinstein 1966		2	0.55	4	0.03	3	0.26	2	0.79	18	0.61	2	0.69
Schilhawsky 1960		38	0.42	56	0.00	28	0.07	20	0.45	20	0.49	17	0.47
Shebanova 2002		42	0.40	61	0.00	51	0.05	52	0.05	55	0.05	60	0.05
Smith 1975		65	0.32	85	0.00	59	0.04	70	0.04	61	0.05	63	0.04
Sokolov 2002		28	0.44	20	0.00	50	0.06	51	0.06	43	0.12	49	0.08
Sztompka 1959		14	0.49	13	0.01	18	0.15	14	0.56	12	0.63	10	0.59
Tomsic 1995		49	0.38	64	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	60	0.06	59	0.05
Uninsky 1932		73	0.27	21	0.00	57	0.04	68	0.04	57	0.04	68	0.04
Uninsky 1971		35	0.43	17	0.01	32	0.09	26	0.40	37	0.27	29	0.33
Wasowski 1980		58	0.34	40	0.00	69	0.05	53	0.05	74	0.05	58	0.05
Zak 1937		47	0.39	42	0.00	45	0.08	49	0.08	44	0.10	47	0.09
Zak 1951		36	0.42	26	0.00	42	0.09	39	0.24	37	0.11	40	0.16
Random 1		90	-0.07	79	0.00	88	0.01	89	0.01	40	0.16	72	0.04
Random 2		87	0.09	80	0.00	89	0.01	88	0.01	20	0.31	55	0.06
Random 3		89	-0.06	62	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	11	0.37	48	0.09

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).