Horowitz 1949

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		6	0.40	17	0.01	4	0.15	4	0.58	13	0.46	5	0.52
Anderszewski 2003		39	0.31	41	0.00	46	0.06	49	0.06	78	0.03	54	0.04
Ashkenazy 1981		4	0.43	5	0.05	3	0.33	1	0.68	2	0.59	1	0.63
Bacha 2000		48	0.29	65	0.00	50	0.06	48	0.06	57	0.04	46	0.05
Badura 1965		74	0.21	25	0.00	61	0.04	67	0.04	67	0.03	76	0.03
Barbosa 1983		23	0.33	74	0.00	34	0.05	35	0.18	75	0.03	42	0.07
Biret 1990		16	0.35	42	0.00	15	0.16	12	0.48	78	0.03	25	0.12
Blet 2003		9	0.38	6	0.05	10	0.14	14	0.45	28	0.22	9	0.31
Block 1995		60	0.25	66	0.00	40	0.04	39	0.14	76	0.04	43	0.07
Blumental 1952		11	0.37	34	0.00	6	0.13	8	0.54	61	0.05	16	0.16
Boshniakovich 1969		37	0.31	24	0.00	27	0.09	26	0.31	86	0.03	32	0.10
Brailowsky 1960		1	0.49	1	0.34	1	0.33	2	0.66	15	0.55	2	0.60
Bunin 1987		3	0.43	10	0.02	13	0.11	11	0.49	34	0.16	11	0.28
Bunin 1987b		8	0.38	7	0.04	23	0.08	31	0.25	65	0.04	31	0.10
Chiu 1999		62	0.25	51	0.00	52	0.05	63	0.05	74	0.03	50	0.04
Cohen 1997		63	0.25	35	0.00	38	0.04	43	0.11	65	0.04	44	0.07
Cortot 1951		84	0.13	67	0.00	84	0.03	77	0.03	86	0.02	88	0.02
Csalog 1996		54	0.27	18	0.01	60	0.04	66	0.04	81	0.03	75	0.03
Czerny 1949		76	0.20	23	0.00	81	0.03	84	0.03	86	0.02	83	0.02
Czerny 1990		59	0.26	83	0.00	65	0.05	58	0.05	79	0.03	60	0.04
Duchoud 2007		87	0.10	44	0.00	79	0.03	82	0.03	81	0.02	84	0.02
Ezaki 2006		69	0.23	75	0.00	77	0.04	68	0.04	78	0.03	64	0.03
Falvay 1989		19	0.34	76	0.00	42	0.05	38	0.15	55	0.05	33	0.09
Farrell 1958		88	0.06	72	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	90	0.01	89	0.01
Ferenczy 1958		20	0.34	29	0.00	12	0.11	15	0.43	38	0.19	10	0.29
Fliere 1977		35	0.31	84	0.00	49	0.08	45	0.08	87	0.03	47	0.05
Fou 1978		43	0.30	58	0.00	28	0.09	29	0.27	72	0.04	30	0.10
Francois 1956		75	0.21	77	0.00	66	0.03	74	0.03	84	0.03	77	0.03
Friedman 1923		47	0.29	52	0.00	33	0.06	27	0.31	75	0.04	29	0.11
Friedman 1923b		52	0.27	36	0.00	30	0.05	30	0.26	55	0.05	27	0.11
Friedman 1930		33	0.31	70	0.00	11	0.13	10	0.50	37	0.20	8	0.32
Garcia 2007		81	0.17	89	0.00	80	0.03	78	0.03	84	0.02	85	0.02
Garcia 2007b		67	0.24	49	0.00	74	0.05	57	0.05	87	0.02	78	0.03
Gierzod 1998		15	0.36	28	0.00	26	0.08	20	0.39	86	0.02	34	0.09
Gornostaeva 1994		32	0.32	53	0.00	45	0.07	47	0.07	85	0.02	59	0.04
Groot 1988		5	0.41	13	0.01	7	0.14	5	0.56	60	0.05	14	0.17
Harasiewicz 1955		38	0.31	46	0.00	48	0.06	50	0.06	86	0.03	62	0.04
Hatto 1993		40	0.31	90	0.00	19	0.09	17	0.42	80	0.03	28	0.11
Hatto 1997		34	0.31	69	0.00	20	0.09	19	0.39	78	0.04	24	0.12
Horowitz 1949		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Indjic 1988		42	0.30	78	0.00	25	0.07	23	0.36	74	0.04	23	0.12
Kapell 1951		80	0.18	19	0.01	82	0.03	83	0.03	86	0.02	81	0.02
Kissin 1993		71	0.23	85	0.00	64	0.06	51	0.06	83	0.03	53	0.04
Kushner 1989		51	0.27	27	0.00	58	0.05	56	0.05	87	0.02	68	0.03
Luisada 1991		2	0.44	2	0.12	2	0.35	3	0.63	13	0.51	3	0.57
Lushtak 2004		55	0.27	47	0.00	54	0.04	65	0.04	76	0.04	58	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		57	0.26	21	0.01	71	0.04	69	0.04	80	0.02	70	0.03
Magaloff 1978		17	0.35	79	0.00	21	0.08	22	0.36	83	0.02	36	0.08
Magin 1975		18	0.35	31	0.00	32	0.06	33	0.19	77	0.03	37	0.08
Michalowski 1933		83	0.14	38	0.00	78	0.04	72	0.04	78	0.02	74	0.03
Milkina 1970		12	0.36	4	0.06	16	0.14	24	0.36	66	0.05	22	0.13
Mohovich 1999		10	0.37	22	0.01	14	0.13	13	0.47	77	0.04	20	0.14
Moravec 1969		14	0.36	54	0.00	29	0.08	25	0.31	68	0.04	26	0.11
Morozova 2008		65	0.24	8	0.03	37	0.05	44	0.08	85	0.03	49	0.05
Neighaus 1950		68	0.24	32	0.00	59	0.05	62	0.05	72	0.03	61	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		49	0.29	3	0.10	5	0.17	9	0.52	10	0.43	6	0.47
Ohlsson 1999		73	0.22	71	0.00	63	0.04	70	0.04	87	0.02	73	0.03
Osinska 1989		70	0.23	80	0.00	68	0.03	80	0.03	77	0.03	65	0.03
Pachmann 1927		85	0.10	40	0.00	86	0.02	86	0.02	85	0.02	82	0.02
Paderewski 1930		78	0.19	43	0.00	73	0.04	73	0.04	69	0.04	52	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		22	0.33	39	0.00	43	0.06	40	0.14	67	0.04	40	0.07
Pierdomenico 2008		77	0.19	68	0.00	85	0.03	81	0.03	83	0.02	80	0.02
Poblocka 1999		30	0.32	50	0.00	47	0.07	46	0.07	65	0.05	45	0.06
Rabcewiczowa 1932		56	0.26	55	0.00	62	0.05	60	0.05	71	0.03	51	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		13	0.36	16	0.01	9	0.17	7	0.55	30	0.28	7	0.39
Rangell 2001		79	0.18	48	0.00	83	0.02	85	0.02	84	0.02	87	0.02
Richter 1976		61	0.25	57	0.00	72	0.03	75	0.03	83	0.03	72	0.03
Rosen 1989		46	0.29	61	0.00	18	0.11	18	0.39	51	0.05	19	0.14
Rosenthal 1930		7	0.39	9	0.02	8	0.14	6	0.55	14	0.55	4	0.55
Rosenthal 1931		25	0.32	45	0.00	31	0.05	32	0.24	44	0.10	17	0.15
Rosenthal 1931b		31	0.32	81	0.00	24	0.07	28	0.29	39	0.19	12	0.23
Rosenthal 1931c		21	0.33	30	0.00	22	0.08	16	0.42	47	0.09	13	0.19
Rosenthal 1931d		24	0.32	59	0.00	41	0.05	37	0.17	43	0.12	21	0.14
Rossi 2007		86	0.10	73	0.00	88	0.02	87	0.02	88	0.02	79	0.02
Rubinstein 1939		58	0.26	11	0.02	76	0.05	61	0.05	85	0.02	67	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		50	0.28	14	0.01	75	0.06	52	0.06	83	0.03	63	0.04
Rubinstein 1966		44	0.30	12	0.01	57	0.05	53	0.05	85	0.03	55	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		53	0.27	37	0.00	51	0.05	64	0.05	78	0.03	56	0.04
Shebanova 2002		41	0.30	33	0.00	17	0.08	21	0.36	47	0.07	15	0.16
Smith 1975		29	0.32	82	0.00	35	0.06	34	0.18	80	0.03	41	0.07
Sokolov 2002		66	0.24	62	0.00	56	0.05	55	0.05	81	0.02	66	0.03
Sztompka 1959		26	0.32	15	0.01	44	0.07	41	0.14	61	0.05	38	0.08
Tomsic 1995		36	0.31	20	0.01	55	0.05	54	0.05	67	0.05	48	0.05
Uninsky 1932		45	0.30	26	0.00	53	0.05	59	0.05	63	0.04	57	0.04
Uninsky 1971		28	0.32	56	0.00	39	0.05	36	0.18	75	0.04	39	0.08
Wasowski 1980		27	0.32	60	0.00	36	0.05	42	0.14	77	0.05	35	0.08
Zak 1937		72	0.23	86	0.00	70	0.04	71	0.04	84	0.03	69	0.03
Zak 1951		64	0.25	87	0.00	69	0.03	76	0.03	82	0.03	71	0.03
Random 1		89	-0.08	63	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	83	0.02	86	0.02
Random 2		82	0.14	64	0.00	67	0.03	79	0.03	1	0.63	18	0.14
Random 3		90	-0.15	88	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	89	0.01	90	0.01

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).