Barbosa 1983

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		59	0.44	69	0.00	63	0.05	64	0.05	71	0.04	74	0.04
Anderszewski 2003		11	0.58	10	0.02	8	0.10	3	0.67	20	0.46	4	0.56
Ashkenazy 1981		42	0.48	40	0.00	74	0.05	57	0.05	80	0.03	78	0.04
Bacha 2000		41	0.48	51	0.00	36	0.06	37	0.19	22	0.34	27	0.25
Badura 1965		46	0.47	54	0.00	59	0.05	59	0.05	60	0.05	60	0.05
Barbosa 1983		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Biret 1990		29	0.54	16	0.01	12	0.08	18	0.52	29	0.28	18	0.38
Blet 2003		36	0.49	44	0.00	55	0.04	68	0.04	41	0.14	49	0.07
Block 1995		45	0.47	20	0.01	23	0.08	26	0.44	23	0.34	15	0.39
Blumental 1952		26	0.54	18	0.01	13	0.09	21	0.47	29	0.24	20	0.34
Boshniakovich 1969		58	0.44	13	0.01	53	0.05	61	0.05	75	0.04	77	0.04
Brailowsky 1960		8	0.59	5	0.07	4	0.16	15	0.54	6	0.69	1	0.61
Bunin 1987		72	0.37	41	0.00	76	0.06	52	0.06	66	0.04	62	0.05
Bunin 1987b		76	0.36	71	0.00	77	0.06	47	0.06	70	0.04	54	0.05
Chiu 1999		6	0.61	12	0.01	10	0.11	8	0.58	4	0.52	5	0.55
Cohen 1997		49	0.46	80	0.00	66	0.04	80	0.04	20	0.33	42	0.11
Cortot 1951		63	0.43	15	0.01	60	0.05	53	0.05	66	0.04	81	0.04
Csalog 1996		73	0.36	72	0.00	42	0.06	43	0.12	33	0.22	38	0.16
Czerny 1949		34	0.50	8	0.03	39	0.05	45	0.11	60	0.05	50	0.07
Czerny 1990		9	0.58	31	0.00	14	0.09	6	0.60	36	0.23	19	0.37
Duchoud 2007		78	0.32	85	0.00	81	0.04	74	0.04	66	0.05	75	0.04
Ezaki 2006		1	0.67	2	0.12	3	0.20	4	0.65	17	0.55	3	0.60
Falvay 1989		21	0.55	19	0.01	25	0.07	31	0.39	26	0.41	13	0.40
Farrell 1958		13	0.57	32	0.00	21	0.08	24	0.45	34	0.33	14	0.39
Ferenczy 1958		38	0.49	47	0.00	46	0.05	55	0.05	20	0.41	39	0.14
Fliere 1977		19	0.55	26	0.00	19	0.09	16	0.53	60	0.05	37	0.16
Fou 1978		23	0.55	21	0.01	28	0.10	30	0.40	43	0.14	31	0.24
Francois 1956		68	0.39	67	0.00	72	0.05	54	0.05	77	0.03	82	0.04
Friedman 1923		52	0.46	36	0.00	67	0.04	77	0.04	46	0.07	64	0.05
Friedman 1923b		53	0.45	60	0.00	68	0.04	75	0.04	69	0.04	79	0.04
Friedman 1930		56	0.44	64	0.00	64	0.04	73	0.04	48	0.06	57	0.05
Garcia 2007		75	0.36	74	0.00	75	0.04	69	0.04	79	0.04	76	0.04
Garcia 2007b		71	0.37	57	0.00	62	0.06	48	0.06	79	0.03	83	0.04
Gierzod 1998		28	0.54	9	0.02	17	0.08	23	0.46	54	0.06	35	0.17
Gornostaeva 1994		43	0.48	61	0.00	35	0.07	34	0.26	40	0.15	33	0.20
Groot 1988		33	0.51	50	0.00	27	0.09	27	0.43	27	0.26	21	0.33
Harasiewicz 1955		7	0.60	23	0.00	18	0.09	7	0.59	51	0.05	36	0.17
Hatto 1993		17	0.55	55	0.00	47	0.06	51	0.06	73	0.04	63	0.05
Hatto 1997		18	0.55	77	0.00	48	0.07	46	0.07	71	0.04	58	0.05
Horowitz 1949		77	0.33	81	0.00	79	0.04	79	0.04	62	0.06	55	0.05
Indjic 1988		22	0.55	86	0.00	49	0.06	50	0.06	63	0.04	56	0.05
Kapell 1951		35	0.50	11	0.01	11	0.11	9	0.58	23	0.35	10	0.45
Kissin 1993		47	0.47	24	0.00	57	0.04	67	0.04	75	0.04	71	0.04
Kushner 1989		24	0.55	28	0.00	24	0.08	22	0.47	43	0.13	28	0.25
Luisada 1991		4	0.63	14	0.01	9	0.10	5	0.64	27	0.32	9	0.45
Lushtak 2004		5	0.62	3	0.09	5	0.15	13	0.55	24	0.41	8	0.47
Malcuzynski 1961		79	0.32	37	0.00	65	0.05	65	0.05	72	0.04	68	0.04
Magaloff 1978		31	0.53	34	0.00	32	0.10	32	0.33	25	0.31	22	0.32
Magin 1975		57	0.44	49	0.00	45	0.06	41	0.13	55	0.05	46	0.08
Michalowski 1933		88	0.18	82	0.00	86	0.02	89	0.02	85	0.03	89	0.02
Milkina 1970		32	0.52	6	0.05	7	0.11	11	0.57	35	0.32	12	0.43
Mohovich 1999		14	0.57	65	0.00	16	0.11	17	0.52	31	0.38	11	0.44
Moravec 1969		44	0.47	27	0.00	40	0.05	36	0.20	28	0.33	25	0.26
Morozova 2008		30	0.54	70	0.00	34	0.08	35	0.25	44	0.12	34	0.17
Neighaus 1950		67	0.40	62	0.00	70	0.04	78	0.04	56	0.05	80	0.04
Niedzielski 1931		66	0.40	29	0.00	58	0.05	63	0.05	57	0.05	53	0.05
Ohlsson 1999		51	0.46	52	0.00	52	0.05	56	0.05	81	0.03	70	0.04
Osinska 1989		20	0.55	46	0.00	20	0.11	12	0.57	44	0.14	24	0.28
Pachmann 1927		80	0.27	89	0.00	83	0.03	84	0.03	71	0.03	86	0.03
Paderewski 1930		84	0.22	75	0.00	80	0.04	81	0.04	72	0.03	85	0.03
Perlemuter 1992		55	0.44	87	0.00	61	0.04	71	0.04	62	0.04	65	0.04
Pierdomenico 2008		82	0.24	56	0.00	78	0.04	76	0.04	80	0.03	84	0.03
Poblocka 1999		48	0.47	35	0.00	44	0.05	42	0.12	74	0.04	47	0.07
Rabcewiczowa 1932		64	0.42	38	0.00	22	0.08	29	0.41	33	0.21	23	0.29
Rachmaninoff 1923		50	0.46	58	0.00	54	0.04	70	0.04	69	0.04	67	0.04
Rangell 2001		74	0.36	68	0.00	56	0.04	66	0.04	32	0.31	43	0.11
Richter 1976		70	0.38	43	0.00	69	0.04	72	0.04	61	0.05	69	0.04
Rosen 1989		37	0.49	76	0.00	33	0.08	33	0.32	59	0.05	40	0.13
Rosenthal 1930		81	0.26	73	0.00	82	0.03	85	0.03	85	0.02	90	0.02
Rosenthal 1931		83	0.22	90	0.00	85	0.03	82	0.03	55	0.06	72	0.04
Rosenthal 1931b		86	0.20	83	0.00	87	0.02	88	0.02	67	0.04	88	0.03
Rosenthal 1931c		85	0.22	78	0.00	84	0.02	86	0.02	71	0.03	91	0.02
Rosenthal 1931d		87	0.19	91	0.00	88	0.03	83	0.03	68	0.04	87	0.03
Rossi 2007		69	0.39	66	0.00	73	0.05	62	0.05	50	0.06	52	0.05
Rubinstein 1939		12	0.57	63	0.00	29	0.08	28	0.41	26	0.35	17	0.38
Rubinstein 1952		25	0.55	45	0.00	15	0.10	14	0.54	22	0.45	6	0.49
Rubinstein 1966		3	0.64	7	0.03	2	0.15	2	0.71	13	0.53	2	0.61
Schilhawsky 1960		65	0.41	53	0.00	71	0.05	58	0.05	74	0.04	73	0.04
Shebanova 2002		39	0.49	48	0.00	37	0.05	38	0.18	62	0.05	45	0.09
Smith 1975		27	0.54	22	0.00	26	0.08	25	0.44	23	0.32	16	0.38
Sokolov 2002		62	0.43	33	0.00	51	0.05	60	0.05	59	0.04	66	0.04
Sztompka 1959		40	0.48	84	0.00	38	0.05	44	0.12	68	0.04	48	0.07
Tomsic 1995		60	0.43	79	0.00	41	0.07	39	0.18	33	0.34	30	0.25
Uninsky 1932		54	0.45	30	0.00	50	0.06	49	0.06	52	0.06	51	0.06
Uninsky 1971		61	0.43	25	0.00	43	0.06	40	0.15	55	0.06	44	0.09
Wasowski 1980		10	0.58	4	0.09	6	0.17	10	0.58	28	0.39	7	0.48
Zak 1937		15	0.55	17	0.01	31	0.17	20	0.47	43	0.13	29	0.25
Zak 1951		16	0.55	42	0.00	30	0.12	19	0.49	39	0.14	26	0.26
Average		2	0.65	1	0.33	1	0.33	1	0.78	61	0.05	32	0.20
Random 1		91	-0.01	88	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	22	0.28	61	0.05
Random 2		89	0.00	39	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	26	0.26	59	0.05
Random 3		90	-0.01	59	0.00	89	0.02	87	0.02	1	0.63	41	0.11

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).