Rosenthal 1931b

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		27	0.35	61	0.00	51	0.05	56	0.05	55	0.04	59	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		31	0.35	45	0.00	35	0.07	31	0.25	71	0.04	30	0.10
Ashkenazy 1981		28	0.35	62	0.00	34	0.07	28	0.32	47	0.06	21	0.14
Bacha 2000		38	0.33	15	0.00	30	0.07	37	0.21	64	0.03	35	0.08
Badura 1965		49	0.30	13	0.00	49	0.05	57	0.05	64	0.04	61	0.04
Barbosa 1983		56	0.28	16	0.00	50	0.04	62	0.04	82	0.03	76	0.03
Biret 1990		10	0.43	6	0.01	17	0.11	17	0.47	67	0.04	22	0.14
Blet 2003		17	0.39	25	0.00	16	0.13	15	0.50	31	0.21	10	0.32
Block 1995		63	0.27	14	0.00	45	0.07	45	0.13	66	0.04	44	0.07
Blumental 1952		14	0.40	21	0.00	14	0.13	11	0.54	58	0.06	13	0.18
Boshniakovich 1969		53	0.30	46	0.00	59	0.04	73	0.04	77	0.03	79	0.03
Brailowsky 1960		9	0.44	37	0.00	10	0.20	6	0.63	32	0.39	7	0.50
Bunin 1987		30	0.35	77	0.00	40	0.06	30	0.26	75	0.03	34	0.09
Bunin 1987b		36	0.34	35	0.00	41	0.08	32	0.24	77	0.03	38	0.08
Chiu 1999		67	0.25	63	0.00	66	0.05	58	0.05	86	0.02	69	0.03
Cohen 1997		52	0.30	64	0.00	29	0.06	33	0.23	62	0.04	31	0.10
Cortot 1951		88	0.13	47	0.00	87	0.02	87	0.02	72	0.03	91	0.02
Csalog 1996		6	0.45	5	0.01	7	0.19	8	0.58	39	0.18	9	0.32
Czerny 1949		81	0.19	78	0.00	83	0.02	84	0.02	86	0.02	87	0.02
Czerny 1990		47	0.31	48	0.00	26	0.06	25	0.35	81	0.03	32	0.10
Duchoud 2007		79	0.19	79	0.00	79	0.05	55	0.05	73	0.03	60	0.04
Ezaki 2006		41	0.33	26	0.00	56	0.04	71	0.04	77	0.03	64	0.03
Falvay 1989		13	0.41	65	0.00	23	0.07	24	0.36	46	0.06	17	0.15
Farrell 1958		70	0.25	49	0.00	67	0.05	51	0.05	82	0.03	51	0.04
Ferenczy 1958		19	0.39	50	0.00	20	0.07	19	0.45	44	0.12	12	0.23
Fliere 1977		7	0.44	38	0.00	12	0.13	16	0.50	48	0.06	14	0.17
Fou 1978		26	0.37	22	0.00	37	0.06	39	0.20	82	0.03	37	0.08
Francois 1956		77	0.21	80	0.00	68	0.04	63	0.04	83	0.03	81	0.03
Friedman 1923		62	0.27	18	0.00	53	0.06	46	0.06	60	0.05	48	0.05
Friedman 1923b		55	0.28	36	0.00	48	0.05	53	0.05	72	0.04	63	0.04
Friedman 1930		43	0.32	81	0.00	33	0.07	29	0.30	49	0.07	20	0.14
Garcia 2007		83	0.17	24	0.00	85	0.03	81	0.03	82	0.03	78	0.03
Garcia 2007b		74	0.23	28	0.00	72	0.04	77	0.04	87	0.02	82	0.03
Gierzod 1998		22	0.38	33	0.00	25	0.07	22	0.38	64	0.04	27	0.12
Gornostaeva 1994		51	0.30	66	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.13	80	0.03	45	0.06
Groot 1988		8	0.44	12	0.00	13	0.18	10	0.56	71	0.04	18	0.15
Harasiewicz 1955		37	0.33	51	0.00	19	0.08	27	0.33	72	0.04	29	0.11
Hatto 1993		16	0.39	52	0.00	18	0.13	18	0.46	76	0.04	23	0.14
Hatto 1997		21	0.38	39	0.00	24	0.09	21	0.39	61	0.04	26	0.12
Horowitz 1949		46	0.32	67	0.00	32	0.06	40	0.19	29	0.29	11	0.23
Indjic 1988		20	0.39	53	0.00	22	0.10	20	0.42	73	0.04	24	0.13
Kapell 1951		45	0.32	82	0.00	62	0.05	48	0.05	73	0.04	52	0.04
Kissin 1993		82	0.17	68	0.00	84	0.02	82	0.02	86	0.03	86	0.02
Kushner 1989		25	0.37	54	0.00	39	0.06	35	0.22	70	0.04	33	0.09
Luisada 1991		50	0.30	40	0.00	52	0.05	47	0.05	85	0.03	49	0.04
Lushtak 2004		54	0.30	55	0.00	27	0.07	26	0.34	52	0.05	25	0.13
Malcuzynski 1961		64	0.26	19	0.00	28	0.06	38	0.20	71	0.03	39	0.08
Magaloff 1978		24	0.38	69	0.00	42	0.06	41	0.18	69	0.03	42	0.07
Magin 1975		11	0.43	20	0.00	15	0.12	14	0.50	73	0.04	19	0.14
Michalowski 1933		84	0.17	10	0.00	69	0.04	60	0.04	53	0.04	55	0.04
Milkina 1970		44	0.32	56	0.00	60	0.04	68	0.04	81	0.03	71	0.03
Mohovich 1999		23	0.38	57	0.00	21	0.08	23	0.37	81	0.03	28	0.11
Moravec 1969		12	0.42	27	0.00	9	0.16	13	0.52	34	0.21	8	0.33
Morozova 2008		68	0.25	70	0.00	70	0.04	78	0.04	84	0.03	77	0.03
Neighaus 1950		76	0.22	58	0.00	71	0.04	61	0.04	81	0.02	80	0.03
Niedzielski 1931		35	0.34	41	0.00	8	0.18	9	0.56	3	0.52	5	0.54
Ohlsson 1999		66	0.26	83	0.00	75	0.04	72	0.04	76	0.03	75	0.03
Osinska 1989		48	0.31	71	0.00	54	0.04	74	0.04	81	0.03	66	0.03
Pachmann 1927		86	0.15	84	0.00	86	0.02	89	0.02	88	0.02	85	0.02
Paderewski 1930		85	0.17	42	0.00	81	0.02	86	0.02	73	0.03	84	0.02
Perlemuter 1992		72	0.24	85	0.00	78	0.04	64	0.04	77	0.03	65	0.03
Pierdomenico 2008		59	0.28	29	0.00	65	0.04	70	0.04	65	0.04	50	0.04
Poblocka 1999		57	0.28	59	0.00	47	0.05	50	0.05	67	0.05	46	0.05
Rabcewiczowa 1932		18	0.39	30	0.00	11	0.16	12	0.53	50	0.05	16	0.16
Rachmaninoff 1923		15	0.40	11	0.00	6	0.27	7	0.60	23	0.44	6	0.51
Rangell 2001		87	0.15	86	0.00	88	0.02	83	0.02	86	0.02	90	0.02
Richter 1976		73	0.24	87	0.00	76	0.04	76	0.04	89	0.02	73	0.03
Rosen 1989		42	0.32	17	0.00	46	0.05	49	0.05	86	0.03	62	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		4	0.71	4	0.02	4	0.82	4	0.90	1	0.87	4	0.88
Rosenthal 1931		2	0.79	1	0.50	1	0.49	2	0.94	1	0.94	2	0.94
Rosenthal 1931b		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Rosenthal 1931c		3	0.76	3	0.16	3	0.70	3	0.93	1	0.95	3	0.94
Rosenthal 1931d		1	0.79	2	0.29	2	0.60	1	0.95	1	0.95	1	0.95
Rossi 2007		75	0.22	88	0.00	80	0.03	80	0.03	79	0.03	68	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		60	0.28	34	0.00	73	0.04	65	0.04	83	0.03	70	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		29	0.35	7	0.00	43	0.06	42	0.15	83	0.02	47	0.05
Rubinstein 1966		32	0.34	31	0.00	58	0.04	67	0.04	78	0.04	57	0.04
Schilhawsky 1960		33	0.34	72	0.00	36	0.06	36	0.21	71	0.03	40	0.08
Shebanova 2002		61	0.27	73	0.00	55	0.04	75	0.04	78	0.04	58	0.04
Smith 1975		40	0.33	74	0.00	31	0.06	34	0.22	76	0.03	36	0.08
Sokolov 2002		58	0.28	75	0.00	61	0.05	59	0.05	85	0.02	67	0.03
Sztompka 1959		80	0.19	32	0.00	77	0.04	66	0.04	80	0.03	74	0.03
Tomsic 1995		69	0.25	60	0.00	74	0.03	79	0.03	81	0.03	72	0.03
Uninsky 1932		65	0.26	89	0.00	38	0.06	43	0.14	61	0.04	43	0.07
Uninsky 1971		71	0.25	43	0.00	63	0.05	52	0.05	86	0.03	56	0.04
Wasowski 1980		78	0.20	90	0.00	82	0.02	85	0.02	86	0.03	83	0.02
Zak 1937		39	0.33	23	0.00	64	0.05	54	0.05	73	0.04	53	0.04
Zak 1951		34	0.34	9	0.00	57	0.04	69	0.04	76	0.04	54	0.04
Average		5	0.53	8	0.00	5	0.23	5	0.71	75	0.04	15	0.17
Random 1		91	-0.05	91	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	51	0.04	88	0.02
Random 2		89	0.01	76	0.00	89	0.02	88	0.02	22	0.31	41	0.08
Random 3		90	-0.04	44	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	72	0.03	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).