Lushtak 2004

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		85	0.23	74	0.00	85	0.04	81	0.04	80	0.03	88	0.03
Anderszewski 2003		11	0.56	29	0.00	17	0.07	8	0.59	18	0.51	10	0.55
Ashkenazy 1981		75	0.32	75	0.00	67	0.04	78	0.04	28	0.26	70	0.10
Bacha 2000		72	0.34	80	0.00	77	0.05	58	0.05	21	0.38	48	0.14
Badura 1965		60	0.40	64	0.00	61	0.04	72	0.04	25	0.35	57	0.12
Barbosa 1983		13	0.55	7	0.03	10	0.11	19	0.50	23	0.43	24	0.46
Biret 1990		33	0.49	21	0.00	20	0.07	18	0.51	23	0.43	22	0.47
Blet 2003		59	0.40	81	0.00	66	0.04	73	0.04	21	0.26	69	0.10
Block 1995		32	0.49	57	0.00	42	0.07	42	0.18	12	0.51	40	0.30
Blumental 1952		48	0.43	86	0.00	65	0.05	57	0.05	60	0.05	76	0.05
Boshniakovich 1969		50	0.43	48	0.00	37	0.08	37	0.26	62	0.05	63	0.11
Brailowsky 1960		29	0.50	18	0.01	14	0.07	39	0.23	29	0.42	39	0.31
Bunin 1987		53	0.42	65	0.00	41	0.09	41	0.19	11	0.47	41	0.30
Bunin 1987b		56	0.41	30	0.00	40	0.09	40	0.21	10	0.52	37	0.33
Chiu 1999		54	0.42	52	0.00	63	0.04	77	0.04	34	0.20	72	0.09
Cohen 1997		70	0.35	54	0.00	75	0.04	67	0.04	15	0.31	64	0.11
Cortot 1951		74	0.32	11	0.02	60	0.04	65	0.04	40	0.23	71	0.10
Csalog 1996		38	0.46	34	0.00	47	0.05	49	0.05	34	0.21	68	0.10
Czerny 1949		26	0.50	20	0.00	30	0.09	35	0.31	29	0.50	33	0.39
Czerny 1990		10	0.56	15	0.01	19	0.10	16	0.52	33	0.47	19	0.49
Duchoud 2007		73	0.33	38	0.00	55	0.05	60	0.05	4	0.59	43	0.17
Ezaki 2006		17	0.53	69	0.00	31	0.09	28	0.40	31	0.27	36	0.33
Falvay 1989		6	0.58	9	0.02	8	0.14	4	0.66	13	0.61	4	0.63
Farrell 1958		20	0.51	26	0.00	25	0.11	21	0.48	13	0.58	14	0.53
Ferenczy 1958		57	0.41	68	0.00	69	0.03	86	0.03	41	0.15	73	0.07
Fliere 1977		8	0.57	16	0.01	5	0.15	12	0.56	12	0.51	13	0.53
Fou 1978		51	0.43	70	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.07	36	0.19	55	0.12
Francois 1956		55	0.42	76	0.00	54	0.05	54	0.05	8	0.52	44	0.16
Friedman 1923		66	0.36	83	0.00	72	0.04	79	0.04	27	0.32	65	0.11
Friedman 1923b		67	0.36	84	0.00	71	0.04	80	0.04	24	0.39	58	0.12
Friedman 1930		68	0.36	77	0.00	73	0.04	68	0.04	45	0.08	74	0.06
Garcia 2007		76	0.31	71	0.00	80	0.05	59	0.05	64	0.04	83	0.04
Garcia 2007b		47	0.43	85	0.00	38	0.07	38	0.24	20	0.46	38	0.33
Gierzod 1998		7	0.58	17	0.01	6	0.11	7	0.61	24	0.44	15	0.52
Gornostaeva 1994		22	0.51	28	0.00	36	0.08	31	0.35	22	0.41	34	0.38
Groot 1988		45	0.44	8	0.03	11	0.08	25	0.42	12	0.42	29	0.42
Harasiewicz 1955		3	0.59	6	0.04	9	0.15	6	0.64	13	0.61	6	0.62
Hatto 1993		16	0.54	82	0.00	22	0.09	14	0.54	16	0.50	16	0.52
Hatto 1997		15	0.54	40	0.00	16	0.07	11	0.56	12	0.53	12	0.54
Horowitz 1949		83	0.27	59	0.00	83	0.04	76	0.04	65	0.04	81	0.04
Indjic 1988		14	0.55	35	0.00	21	0.08	13	0.55	15	0.53	11	0.54
Kapell 1951		18	0.52	36	0.00	29	0.09	26	0.42	27	0.46	26	0.44
Kissin 1993		19	0.51	78	0.00	35	0.09	33	0.34	19	0.52	28	0.42
Kushner 1989		9	0.56	10	0.02	7	0.12	5	0.66	15	0.51	7	0.58
Luisada 1991		63	0.39	79	0.00	76	0.04	69	0.04	50	0.05	77	0.04
Lushtak 2004		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Malcuzynski 1961		28	0.50	23	0.00	28	0.11	27	0.41	33	0.37	32	0.39
Magaloff 1978		25	0.50	49	0.00	34	0.09	34	0.33	20	0.45	31	0.39
Magin 1975		31	0.50	31	0.00	33	0.08	29	0.39	19	0.49	25	0.44
Michalowski 1933		87	0.13	55	0.00	87	0.03	84	0.03	64	0.03	87	0.03
Milkina 1970		23	0.51	12	0.02	13	0.09	15	0.53	27	0.40	23	0.46
Mohovich 1999		27	0.50	32	0.00	24	0.12	23	0.45	24	0.43	27	0.44
Moravec 1969		35	0.49	50	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	37	0.18	45	0.15
Morozova 2008		52	0.43	33	0.00	51	0.05	56	0.05	33	0.23	60	0.11
Neighaus 1950		49	0.43	53	0.00	56	0.04	63	0.04	11	0.52	52	0.14
Niedzielski 1931		84	0.23	60	0.00	84	0.03	83	0.03	63	0.05	80	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		34	0.49	22	0.00	23	0.11	17	0.52	3	0.64	8	0.58
Osinska 1989		2	0.60	2	0.15	3	0.29	3	0.71	14	0.63	3	0.67
Pachmann 1927		79	0.30	61	0.00	79	0.05	52	0.05	23	0.40	50	0.14
Paderewski 1930		86	0.14	87	0.00	86	0.03	85	0.03	70	0.04	86	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		77	0.30	66	0.00	62	0.04	66	0.04	34	0.25	66	0.10
Pierdomenico 2008		78	0.30	45	0.00	70	0.03	87	0.03	28	0.36	67	0.10
Poblocka 1999		5	0.58	37	0.00	18	0.10	10	0.56	11	0.56	9	0.56
Rabcewiczowa 1932		37	0.48	25	0.00	12	0.09	20	0.50	7	0.50	17	0.50
Rachmaninoff 1923		62	0.39	39	0.00	58	0.04	70	0.04	56	0.05	79	0.04
Rangell 2001		36	0.49	5	0.04	15	0.07	32	0.35	6	0.62	21	0.47
Richter 1976		39	0.46	14	0.01	43	0.06	43	0.13	29	0.33	42	0.21
Rosen 1989		44	0.44	51	0.00	50	0.05	55	0.05	36	0.26	62	0.11
Rosenthal 1930		64	0.38	24	0.00	59	0.03	82	0.03	23	0.41	61	0.11
Rosenthal 1931		69	0.36	27	0.00	68	0.05	53	0.05	24	0.39	51	0.14
Rosenthal 1931b		80	0.30	42	0.00	78	0.05	51	0.05	25	0.34	53	0.13
Rosenthal 1931c		71	0.35	88	0.00	74	0.04	64	0.04	62	0.05	85	0.04
Rosenthal 1931d		81	0.27	63	0.00	82	0.04	74	0.04	59	0.04	84	0.04
Rossi 2007		82	0.27	43	0.00	81	0.04	71	0.04	70	0.04	78	0.04
Rubinstein 1939		42	0.45	46	0.00	39	0.11	36	0.28	22	0.42	35	0.34
Rubinstein 1952		4	0.59	3	0.06	2	0.32	2	0.73	4	0.68	2	0.70
Rubinstein 1966		1	0.64	1	0.38	1	0.38	1	0.76	4	0.73	1	0.74
Schilhawsky 1960		58	0.40	58	0.00	57	0.05	61	0.05	52	0.05	75	0.05
Shebanova 2002		12	0.56	4	0.04	4	0.13	9	0.58	1	0.68	5	0.63
Smith 1975		41	0.45	56	0.00	52	0.05	50	0.05	33	0.29	54	0.12
Sokolov 2002		61	0.40	67	0.00	64	0.04	75	0.04	32	0.33	59	0.11
Sztompka 1959		43	0.44	41	0.00	48	0.06	46	0.06	32	0.36	46	0.15
Tomsic 1995		46	0.44	89	0.00	49	0.06	48	0.06	24	0.34	49	0.14
Uninsky 1932		65	0.36	62	0.00	53	0.05	62	0.05	26	0.43	47	0.15
Uninsky 1971		40	0.45	47	0.00	46	0.06	47	0.06	39	0.26	56	0.12
Wasowski 1980		21	0.51	13	0.01	32	0.09	30	0.36	22	0.44	30	0.40
Zak 1937		30	0.50	19	0.01	27	0.10	24	0.43	16	0.51	20	0.47
Zak 1951		24	0.51	44	0.00	26	0.09	22	0.46	17	0.53	18	0.49
Random 1		90	-0.14	72	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	84	0.02	90	0.01
Random 2		88	0.02	73	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	41	0.09	82	0.04
Random 3		89	-0.11	90	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	56	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).