Bunin 1987

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		38	0.42	19	0.00	40	0.06	35	0.23	89	0.02	45	0.07
Anderszewski 2003		23	0.46	20	0.00	27	0.13	25	0.39	65	0.04	30	0.12
Ashkenazy 1981		16	0.48	21	0.00	17	0.07	9	0.50	46	0.07	11	0.19
Bacha 2000		63	0.35	45	0.00	64	0.04	67	0.04	78	0.03	68	0.03
Badura 1965		18	0.47	8	0.00	6	0.14	13	0.48	29	0.36	6	0.42
Barbosa 1983		55	0.37	22	0.00	57	0.04	66	0.04	52	0.06	50	0.05
Biret 1990		72	0.34	23	0.00	69	0.05	47	0.05	76	0.04	66	0.04
Blet 2003		67	0.35	24	0.00	68	0.05	49	0.05	66	0.04	61	0.04
Block 1995		56	0.37	6	0.00	52	0.05	59	0.05	65	0.04	63	0.04
Blumental 1952		69	0.34	46	0.00	63	0.04	61	0.04	86	0.03	81	0.03
Boshniakovich 1969		8	0.53	47	0.00	8	0.18	6	0.54	42	0.12	9	0.25
Brailowsky 1960		76	0.31	25	0.00	81	0.03	81	0.03	81	0.04	70	0.03
Bunin 1987		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Bunin 1987b		1	0.99	1	1.00	1	0.99	1	1.00	1	1.00	1	1.00
Chiu 1999		60	0.35	26	0.00	47	0.05	58	0.05	60	0.05	48	0.05
Cohen 1997		87	0.21	27	0.00	76	0.04	73	0.04	86	0.03	83	0.03
Cortot 1951		62	0.35	48	0.00	54	0.05	55	0.05	79	0.03	67	0.04
Csalog 1996		59	0.35	49	0.00	58	0.03	77	0.03	69	0.04	78	0.03
Czerny 1949		2	0.58	28	0.00	4	0.17	4	0.56	36	0.34	5	0.44
Czerny 1990		51	0.38	9	0.00	61	0.04	69	0.04	86	0.03	84	0.03
Duchoud 2007		52	0.37	7	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.12	50	0.06	44	0.08
Ezaki 2006		37	0.43	50	0.00	41	0.06	37	0.21	75	0.04	39	0.09
Falvay 1989		74	0.33	29	0.00	79	0.03	88	0.03	87	0.03	72	0.03
Farrell 1958		82	0.28	51	0.00	78	0.03	87	0.03	87	0.03	75	0.03
Ferenczy 1958		30	0.44	52	0.00	39	0.06	42	0.19	52	0.05	36	0.10
Fliere 1977		13	0.50	53	0.00	16	0.07	14	0.48	50	0.06	12	0.17
Fou 1978		70	0.34	30	0.00	72	0.04	63	0.04	88	0.03	76	0.03
Francois 1956		54	0.37	54	0.00	66	0.04	68	0.04	81	0.03	88	0.03
Friedman 1923		58	0.36	55	0.00	42	0.05	41	0.20	53	0.06	35	0.11
Friedman 1923b		64	0.35	31	0.00	43	0.08	43	0.19	64	0.05	38	0.10
Friedman 1930		49	0.38	3	0.00	33	0.08	34	0.28	46	0.09	16	0.16
Garcia 2007		48	0.38	10	0.00	60	0.03	76	0.03	75	0.04	80	0.03
Garcia 2007b		40	0.42	13	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.13	58	0.04	46	0.07
Gierzod 1998		17	0.48	56	0.00	31	0.14	29	0.35	73	0.04	32	0.12
Gornostaeva 1994		36	0.43	57	0.00	32	0.08	33	0.30	66	0.03	42	0.09
Groot 1988		33	0.44	14	0.00	12	0.08	30	0.32	50	0.06	23	0.14
Harasiewicz 1955		19	0.46	58	0.00	24	0.09	16	0.46	47	0.06	14	0.17
Hatto 1993		32	0.44	59	0.00	29	0.10	22	0.40	81	0.03	34	0.11
Hatto 1997		31	0.44	60	0.00	30	0.11	27	0.39	53	0.06	18	0.15
Horowitz 1949		5	0.56	2	0.00	9	0.18	5	0.54	12	0.51	3	0.52
Indjic 1988		29	0.44	61	0.00	28	0.10	21	0.40	71	0.04	28	0.13
Kapell 1951		9	0.51	32	0.00	22	0.07	24	0.40	55	0.05	20	0.14
Kissin 1993		43	0.41	62	0.00	49	0.05	56	0.05	87	0.02	77	0.03
Kushner 1989		26	0.45	63	0.00	36	0.06	39	0.20	74	0.03	43	0.08
Luisada 1991		42	0.41	64	0.00	50	0.05	48	0.05	86	0.03	52	0.04
Lushtak 2004		24	0.45	33	0.00	26	0.10	32	0.32	52	0.06	22	0.14
Malcuzynski 1961		21	0.46	65	0.00	11	0.07	17	0.45	71	0.04	27	0.13
Magaloff 1978		71	0.34	66	0.00	73	0.05	53	0.05	80	0.03	54	0.04
Magin 1975		20	0.46	34	0.00	13	0.07	19	0.43	72	0.04	26	0.13
Michalowski 1933		46	0.39	67	0.00	20	0.06	28	0.37	32	0.26	7	0.31
Milkina 1970		45	0.39	15	0.00	59	0.03	78	0.03	88	0.02	89	0.02
Mohovich 1999		47	0.39	68	0.00	55	0.04	62	0.04	88	0.03	82	0.03
Moravec 1969		81	0.29	16	0.00	71	0.04	60	0.04	87	0.02	69	0.03
Morozova 2008		34	0.43	69	0.00	35	0.06	36	0.23	62	0.05	33	0.11
Neighaus 1950		15	0.48	70	0.00	23	0.09	18	0.44	61	0.05	19	0.15
Niedzielski 1931		61	0.35	71	0.00	48	0.05	52	0.05	61	0.04	56	0.04
Ohlsson 1999		25	0.45	35	0.00	14	0.08	10	0.49	62	0.05	15	0.16
Osinska 1989		39	0.42	72	0.00	51	0.06	46	0.06	85	0.03	53	0.04
Pachmann 1927		50	0.38	36	0.00	65	0.03	74	0.03	46	0.08	49	0.05
Paderewski 1930		66	0.35	37	0.00	67	0.05	54	0.05	60	0.04	59	0.04
Perlemuter 1992		28	0.45	38	0.00	38	0.06	40	0.20	68	0.04	41	0.09
Pierdomenico 2008		83	0.27	39	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	78	0.04	73	0.03
Poblocka 1999		14	0.48	73	0.00	19	0.06	20	0.41	66	0.04	24	0.13
Rabcewiczowa 1932		53	0.37	74	0.00	56	0.04	65	0.04	73	0.04	57	0.04
Rachmaninoff 1923		41	0.42	40	0.00	34	0.09	31	0.32	58	0.05	25	0.13
Rangell 2001		65	0.35	75	0.00	53	0.05	57	0.05	80	0.03	65	0.04
Richter 1976		6	0.55	76	0.00	3	0.17	7	0.53	17	0.53	2	0.53
Rosen 1989		73	0.33	77	0.00	70	0.05	51	0.05	79	0.04	64	0.04
Rosenthal 1930		57	0.36	78	0.00	62	0.03	75	0.03	46	0.06	62	0.04
Rosenthal 1931		85	0.24	4	0.00	86	0.03	82	0.03	87	0.02	90	0.02
Rosenthal 1931b		84	0.25	41	0.00	85	0.03	79	0.03	88	0.02	91	0.02
Rosenthal 1931c		78	0.30	17	0.00	74	0.04	71	0.04	82	0.03	86	0.03
Rosenthal 1931d		86	0.24	42	0.00	87	0.04	70	0.04	80	0.03	85	0.03
Rossi 2007		88	0.17	79	0.00	88	0.03	85	0.03	80	0.04	71	0.03
Rubinstein 1939		68	0.35	11	0.00	77	0.03	84	0.03	72	0.04	74	0.03
Rubinstein 1952		77	0.31	80	0.00	80	0.03	83	0.03	79	0.03	87	0.03
Rubinstein 1966		80	0.30	81	0.00	82	0.03	80	0.03	88	0.03	79	0.03
Schilhawsky 1960		4	0.56	18	0.00	2	0.28	3	0.58	27	0.42	4	0.49
Shebanova 2002		12	0.50	5	0.00	15	0.09	8	0.50	58	0.05	17	0.16
Smith 1975		79	0.30	82	0.00	75	0.04	72	0.04	61	0.04	55	0.04
Sokolov 2002		35	0.43	83	0.00	18	0.07	23	0.40	43	0.10	10	0.20
Sztompka 1959		44	0.41	84	0.00	46	0.05	50	0.05	80	0.03	60	0.04
Tomsic 1995		75	0.32	85	0.00	83	0.04	64	0.04	70	0.05	58	0.04
Uninsky 1932		22	0.46	43	0.00	25	0.10	26	0.39	59	0.04	31	0.12
Uninsky 1971		7	0.54	86	0.00	7	0.18	12	0.49	43	0.16	8	0.28
Wasowski 1980		27	0.45	12	0.00	37	0.05	38	0.21	74	0.04	40	0.09
Zak 1937		11	0.50	44	0.00	21	0.06	15	0.46	70	0.04	21	0.14
Zak 1951		10	0.51	87	0.00	10	0.08	11	0.49	54	0.06	13	0.17
Average		3	0.57	88	0.00	5	0.25	2	0.58	83	0.03	29	0.13
Random 1		91	-0.02	89	0.00	89	0.02	89	0.02	10	0.46	37	0.10
Random 2		90	-0.01	90	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	23	0.28	51	0.05
Random 3		89	-0.01	91	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	18	0.31	47	0.06

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).