Luisada 1991

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		10	0.53	4	0.08	3	0.13	8	0.61	1	0.69	2	0.65
Anderszewski 2003		36	0.43	66	0.00	41	0.05	37	0.20	61	0.05	44	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		38	0.43	84	0.00	53	0.04	73	0.04	26	0.27	45	0.10
Bacha 2000		78	0.28	49	0.00	67	0.04	76	0.04	66	0.03	79	0.03
Badura 1965		70	0.33	43	0.00	71	0.05	55	0.05	64	0.04	72	0.04
Barbosa 1983		9	0.53	27	0.00	8	0.14	15	0.50	60	0.06	29	0.17
Biret 1990		31	0.44	19	0.01	17	0.09	18	0.49	42	0.11	24	0.23
Blet 2003		11	0.51	11	0.02	12	0.15	10	0.58	1	0.62	3	0.60
Block 1995		58	0.36	88	0.00	51	0.04	60	0.04	59	0.05	74	0.04
Blumental 1952		6	0.54	2	0.09	7	0.16	3	0.65	19	0.55	4	0.60
Boshniakovich 1969		17	0.48	16	0.01	21	0.19	19	0.47	42	0.11	23	0.23
Brailowsky 1960		1	0.58	1	0.22	1	0.22	1	0.73	8	0.66	1	0.69
Bunin 1987		37	0.43	31	0.00	30	0.07	30	0.28	38	0.13	27	0.19
Bunin 1987b		48	0.39	85	0.00	44	0.07	44	0.14	45	0.07	43	0.10
Chiu 1999		73	0.32	71	0.00	63	0.05	53	0.05	63	0.05	55	0.05
Cohen 1997		59	0.36	37	0.00	50	0.04	58	0.04	22	0.23	46	0.10
Cortot 1951		83	0.21	29	0.00	82	0.04	77	0.04	55	0.06	62	0.05
Csalog 1996		61	0.36	45	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.07	64	0.04	59	0.05
Czerny 1949		63	0.35	89	0.00	72	0.03	79	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03
Czerny 1990		53	0.38	86	0.00	61	0.04	66	0.04	68	0.04	75	0.04
Duchoud 2007		87	0.16	47	0.00	84	0.03	85	0.03	84	0.02	89	0.02
Ezaki 2006		15	0.50	30	0.00	23	0.09	26	0.37	53	0.06	32	0.15
Falvay 1989		4	0.55	7	0.06	5	0.18	6	0.61	39	0.32	11	0.44
Farrell 1958		84	0.21	70	0.00	85	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02
Ferenczy 1958		27	0.46	8	0.05	22	0.10	23	0.38	22	0.49	12	0.43
Fliere 1977		8	0.54	9	0.05	11	0.19	7	0.61	38	0.24	14	0.38
Fou 1978		18	0.48	54	0.00	29	0.07	31	0.26	58	0.05	41	0.11
Francois 1956		74	0.31	56	0.00	79	0.05	49	0.05	68	0.04	78	0.04
Friedman 1923		64	0.35	41	0.00	46	0.06	46	0.06	22	0.41	31	0.16
Friedman 1923b		65	0.35	32	0.00	39	0.05	35	0.21	19	0.45	19	0.31
Friedman 1930		66	0.35	42	0.00	31	0.09	28	0.31	17	0.46	15	0.38
Garcia 2007		82	0.21	90	0.00	83	0.04	75	0.04	73	0.04	71	0.04
Garcia 2007b		71	0.33	62	0.00	56	0.05	54	0.05	68	0.05	63	0.05
Gierzod 1998		5	0.55	10	0.02	10	0.16	9	0.60	41	0.20	17	0.35
Gornostaeva 1994		13	0.50	26	0.00	20	0.12	21	0.45	35	0.25	18	0.34
Groot 1988		47	0.39	25	0.00	37	0.05	36	0.20	56	0.05	47	0.10
Harasiewicz 1955		30	0.44	57	0.00	52	0.04	70	0.04	83	0.03	85	0.03
Hatto 1993		25	0.47	51	0.00	16	0.12	20	0.46	44	0.12	25	0.23
Hatto 1997		20	0.48	87	0.00	15	0.10	16	0.49	41	0.12	21	0.24
Horowitz 1949		32	0.44	5	0.08	9	0.15	13	0.51	3	0.63	6	0.57
Indjic 1988		19	0.48	12	0.02	14	0.15	17	0.49	43	0.15	20	0.27
Kapell 1951		51	0.38	76	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	74	0.03	81	0.03
Kissin 1993		42	0.42	33	0.00	60	0.05	51	0.05	69	0.04	67	0.04
Kushner 1989		23	0.47	74	0.00	25	0.09	22	0.39	67	0.04	38	0.12
Luisada 1991		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Lushtak 2004		49	0.39	58	0.00	55	0.05	50	0.05	69	0.04	73	0.04
Malcuzynski 1961		72	0.33	77	0.00	76	0.03	80	0.03	84	0.02	88	0.02
Magaloff 1978		33	0.44	28	0.00	38	0.06	34	0.22	54	0.06	40	0.11
Magin 1975		16	0.49	20	0.01	28	0.07	29	0.30	52	0.05	37	0.12
Michalowski 1933		79	0.28	22	0.01	80	0.04	63	0.04	18	0.40	35	0.13
Milkina 1970		3	0.56	3	0.08	2	0.15	2	0.69	38	0.24	13	0.41
Mohovich 1999		2	0.56	14	0.01	6	0.15	4	0.65	29	0.37	9	0.49
Moravec 1969		26	0.46	78	0.00	32	0.06	33	0.24	55	0.06	36	0.12
Morozova 2008		54	0.37	34	0.00	58	0.04	65	0.04	71	0.04	69	0.04
Neighaus 1950		76	0.30	79	0.00	77	0.03	78	0.03	64	0.04	84	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		62	0.35	36	0.00	49	0.05	52	0.05	18	0.38	33	0.14
Ohlsson 1999		39	0.42	17	0.01	24	0.09	25	0.37	30	0.33	16	0.35
Osinska 1989		24	0.47	46	0.00	26	0.11	24	0.38	48	0.07	30	0.16
Pachmann 1927		81	0.22	82	0.00	86	0.03	83	0.03	76	0.03	82	0.03
Paderewski 1930		85	0.19	50	0.00	69	0.04	64	0.04	41	0.13	50	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		52	0.38	68	0.00	48	0.04	59	0.04	29	0.30	39	0.11
Pierdomenico 2008		86	0.18	80	0.00	87	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02	86	0.02
Poblocka 1999		14	0.50	18	0.01	27	0.09	27	0.31	45	0.11	28	0.18
Rabcewiczowa 1932		77	0.30	44	0.00	65	0.04	71	0.04	81	0.03	80	0.03
Rachmaninoff 1923		40	0.42	13	0.01	36	0.06	39	0.19	35	0.23	26	0.21
Rangell 2001		69	0.33	59	0.00	78	0.04	74	0.04	68	0.05	76	0.04
Richter 1976		46	0.40	69	0.00	59	0.04	61	0.04	57	0.04	66	0.04
Rosen 1989		21	0.47	35	0.00	19	0.15	14	0.50	20	0.43	10	0.46
Rosenthal 1930		56	0.37	38	0.00	73	0.03	81	0.03	44	0.10	60	0.05
Rosenthal 1931		67	0.35	21	0.01	74	0.03	82	0.03	45	0.07	58	0.05
Rosenthal 1931b		75	0.30	40	0.00	75	0.03	84	0.03	46	0.06	77	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		41	0.42	63	0.00	40	0.05	38	0.19	27	0.30	22	0.24
Rosenthal 1931d		50	0.39	67	0.00	62	0.06	47	0.06	29	0.31	34	0.14
Rossi 2007		80	0.27	75	0.00	81	0.04	67	0.04	72	0.04	64	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		55	0.37	55	0.00	68	0.04	69	0.04	68	0.04	65	0.04
Rubinstein 1952		35	0.43	24	0.00	43	0.06	42	0.14	76	0.03	54	0.06
Rubinstein 1966		45	0.41	83	0.00	54	0.04	62	0.04	74	0.04	68	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		28	0.45	60	0.00	35	0.05	43	0.14	59	0.04	51	0.07
Shebanova 2002		44	0.41	23	0.01	34	0.05	40	0.18	62	0.04	49	0.08
Smith 1975		12	0.51	15	0.01	13	0.12	11	0.55	15	0.51	8	0.53
Sokolov 2002		22	0.47	65	0.00	18	0.14	12	0.53	8	0.56	7	0.54
Sztompka 1959		57	0.36	61	0.00	70	0.05	57	0.05	62	0.05	57	0.05
Tomsic 1995		68	0.34	72	0.00	47	0.05	48	0.05	45	0.08	52	0.06
Uninsky 1932		60	0.36	52	0.00	64	0.04	72	0.04	51	0.05	70	0.04
Uninsky 1971		29	0.45	53	0.00	33	0.06	32	0.25	56	0.05	42	0.11
Wasowski 1980		7	0.54	6	0.07	4	0.12	5	0.62	9	0.55	5	0.58
Zak 1937		43	0.42	39	0.00	57	0.05	56	0.05	54	0.05	56	0.05
Zak 1951		34	0.43	73	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.18	50	0.05	48	0.09
Random 1		89	0.00	81	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	44	0.11	61	0.05
Random 2		88	0.03	64	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	33	0.18	53	0.06
Random 3		90	-0.15	48	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	80	0.02	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).