Zak 1951

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		62	0.39	52	0.00	76	0.06	49	0.06	45	0.07	67	0.06
Anderszewski 2003		40	0.45	53	0.00	55	0.04	64	0.04	54	0.06	69	0.05
Ashkenazy 1981		39	0.46	37	0.00	64	0.05	51	0.05	30	0.26	54	0.11
Bacha 2000		72	0.36	54	0.00	78	0.04	71	0.04	71	0.03	82	0.03
Badura 1965		66	0.38	55	0.00	35	0.05	34	0.17	35	0.19	34	0.18
Barbosa 1983		12	0.55	56	0.00	20	0.15	16	0.53	37	0.21	21	0.33
Biret 1990		3	0.63	38	0.00	2	0.31	4	0.74	3	0.63	4	0.68
Blet 2003		64	0.39	57	0.00	62	0.06	47	0.06	41	0.13	60	0.09
Block 1995		44	0.43	58	0.00	53	0.05	55	0.05	37	0.20	56	0.10
Blumental 1952		28	0.50	22	0.00	33	0.06	36	0.15	46	0.08	53	0.11
Boshniakovich 1969		26	0.50	39	0.00	10	0.12	14	0.58	18	0.39	17	0.48
Brailowsky 1960		65	0.39	10	0.00	73	0.04	65	0.04	66	0.05	75	0.04
Bunin 1987		50	0.42	40	0.00	47	0.04	68	0.04	28	0.25	57	0.10
Bunin 1987b		54	0.41	59	0.00	48	0.04	63	0.04	25	0.31	50	0.11
Chiu 1999		34	0.48	60	0.00	34	0.05	35	0.16	9	0.45	25	0.27
Cohen 1997		76	0.33	41	0.00	71	0.04	66	0.04	31	0.17	62	0.08
Cortot 1951		87	0.21	61	0.00	87	0.03	86	0.03	65	0.03	88	0.03
Csalog 1996		16	0.54	4	0.00	16	0.13	15	0.55	11	0.51	12	0.53
Czerny 1949		33	0.48	7	0.00	27	0.09	29	0.29	39	0.32	23	0.30
Czerny 1990		13	0.55	19	0.00	19	0.15	13	0.58	37	0.40	18	0.48
Duchoud 2007		77	0.32	42	0.00	66	0.03	80	0.03	23	0.45	47	0.12
Ezaki 2006		5	0.62	43	0.00	5	0.17	5	0.71	15	0.53	7	0.61
Falvay 1989		4	0.63	3	0.00	4	0.27	3	0.74	7	0.66	2	0.70
Farrell 1958		49	0.42	18	0.00	37	0.05	37	0.11	39	0.24	36	0.16
Ferenczy 1958		38	0.46	62	0.00	42	0.04	39	0.10	31	0.34	33	0.18
Fliere 1977		15	0.54	23	0.00	26	0.11	25	0.36	65	0.05	42	0.13
Fou 1978		19	0.52	13	0.00	29	0.11	27	0.34	38	0.17	27	0.24
Francois 1956		68	0.38	63	0.00	44	0.04	44	0.07	18	0.38	38	0.16
Friedman 1923		63	0.39	12	0.00	41	0.04	38	0.10	17	0.51	29	0.23
Friedman 1923b		59	0.40	64	0.00	43	0.05	40	0.10	12	0.53	28	0.23
Friedman 1930		22	0.51	24	0.00	13	0.16	10	0.61	3	0.74	5	0.67
Garcia 2007		78	0.32	65	0.00	74	0.05	54	0.05	46	0.06	71	0.05
Garcia 2007b		61	0.39	44	0.00	59	0.05	52	0.05	57	0.05	73	0.05
Gierzod 1998		6	0.60	31	0.00	6	0.15	7	0.67	21	0.47	8	0.56
Gornostaeva 1994		14	0.54	32	0.00	15	0.12	19	0.51	16	0.49	14	0.50
Groot 1988		53	0.42	66	0.00	51	0.05	59	0.05	55	0.05	72	0.05
Harasiewicz 1955		11	0.55	45	0.00	18	0.16	11	0.59	32	0.41	16	0.49
Hatto 1993		29	0.50	33	0.00	32	0.06	32	0.27	48	0.05	48	0.12
Hatto 1997		21	0.51	25	0.00	30	0.10	26	0.34	46	0.06	41	0.14
Horowitz 1949		84	0.25	46	0.00	86	0.03	82	0.03	76	0.03	83	0.03
Indjic 1988		27	0.50	67	0.00	31	0.07	30	0.29	47	0.06	44	0.13
Kapell 1951		24	0.51	68	0.00	17	0.12	24	0.40	32	0.38	20	0.39
Kissin 1993		30	0.49	69	0.00	52	0.05	56	0.05	42	0.23	52	0.11
Kushner 1989		8	0.58	26	0.00	7	0.16	6	0.67	22	0.43	10	0.54
Luisada 1991		43	0.43	70	0.00	60	0.05	50	0.05	41	0.18	58	0.09
Lushtak 2004		25	0.51	71	0.00	12	0.15	17	0.53	22	0.46	15	0.49
Malcuzynski 1961		32	0.48	15	0.00	24	0.11	21	0.45	44	0.15	26	0.26
Magaloff 1978		56	0.40	27	0.00	75	0.05	60	0.05	77	0.03	76	0.04
Magin 1975		10	0.56	34	0.00	9	0.11	9	0.64	8	0.61	6	0.62
Michalowski 1933		85	0.23	72	0.00	81	0.03	83	0.03	15	0.44	51	0.11
Milkina 1970		17	0.52	20	0.00	21	0.16	18	0.52	63	0.05	37	0.16
Mohovich 1999		18	0.52	73	0.00	23	0.10	22	0.42	35	0.21	24	0.30
Moravec 1969		55	0.41	74	0.00	72	0.03	77	0.03	60	0.05	74	0.04
Morozova 2008		70	0.37	8	0.00	63	0.06	46	0.06	48	0.08	64	0.07
Neighaus 1950		83	0.30	75	0.00	80	0.02	87	0.02	70	0.04	87	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		73	0.35	76	0.00	65	0.04	72	0.04	25	0.30	49	0.11
Ohlsson 1999		31	0.49	47	0.00	11	0.12	20	0.50	9	0.56	11	0.53
Osinska 1989		2	0.64	2	0.00	3	0.42	2	0.76	13	0.63	3	0.69
Pachmann 1927		71	0.36	48	0.00	69	0.03	84	0.03	16	0.47	46	0.12
Paderewski 1930		86	0.21	77	0.00	79	0.03	81	0.03	53	0.05	77	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		67	0.38	78	0.00	61	0.05	58	0.05	24	0.35	43	0.13
Pierdomenico 2008		69	0.37	79	0.00	58	0.05	53	0.05	24	0.44	40	0.15
Poblocka 1999		23	0.51	80	0.00	28	0.09	31	0.28	47	0.11	32	0.18
Rabcewiczowa 1932		57	0.40	49	0.00	46	0.04	62	0.04	48	0.06	68	0.05
Rachmaninoff 1923		46	0.43	16	0.00	50	0.04	61	0.04	31	0.27	55	0.10
Rangell 2001		48	0.43	17	0.00	40	0.04	43	0.08	27	0.37	35	0.17
Richter 1976		51	0.42	11	0.00	68	0.04	70	0.04	65	0.03	84	0.03
Rosen 1989		20	0.52	35	0.00	25	0.11	23	0.41	19	0.43	19	0.42
Rosenthal 1930		81	0.31	81	0.00	85	0.03	79	0.03	66	0.04	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931		79	0.32	5	0.00	83	0.04	74	0.04	70	0.04	79	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		74	0.34	6	0.00	82	0.04	75	0.04	68	0.04	81	0.04
Rosenthal 1931c		80	0.31	9	0.00	84	0.03	78	0.03	75	0.04	89	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		75	0.33	82	0.00	77	0.04	69	0.04	38	0.17	63	0.08
Rossi 2007		58	0.40	21	0.00	39	0.04	42	0.09	15	0.44	31	0.20
Rubinstein 1939		35	0.47	50	0.00	45	0.04	73	0.04	36	0.22	59	0.09
Rubinstein 1952		9	0.57	83	0.00	14	0.13	12	0.59	25	0.44	13	0.51
Rubinstein 1966		7	0.58	84	0.00	8	0.18	8	0.66	26	0.46	9	0.55
Schilhawsky 1960		47	0.43	28	0.00	49	0.04	67	0.04	62	0.04	80	0.04
Shebanova 2002		37	0.46	85	0.00	22	0.11	28	0.31	23	0.34	22	0.32
Smith 1975		36	0.47	51	0.00	36	0.07	33	0.17	37	0.25	30	0.21
Sokolov 2002		41	0.45	86	0.00	56	0.06	48	0.06	29	0.36	39	0.15
Sztompka 1959		60	0.39	87	0.00	67	0.03	85	0.03	51	0.05	78	0.04
Tomsic 1995		42	0.44	29	0.00	38	0.05	41	0.09	39	0.17	45	0.12
Uninsky 1932		82	0.30	88	0.00	70	0.03	76	0.03	47	0.07	70	0.05
Uninsky 1971		45	0.43	14	0.00	57	0.07	45	0.07	50	0.06	66	0.06
Wasowski 1980		52	0.42	30	0.00	54	0.05	57	0.05	47	0.07	65	0.06
Zak 1937		1	0.96	1	0.99	1	0.98	1	0.99	1	0.99	1	0.99
Zak 1951		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Random 1		90	-0.09	36	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	65	0.03	90	0.02
Random 2		88	0.00	89	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	58	0.04	85	0.03
Random 3		89	-0.02	90	0.00	88	0.02	88	0.02	15	0.33	61	0.08

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).