Fliere 1977

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		5	0.74	48	0.00	13	0.13	16	0.48	8	0.58	20	0.53
Anderszewski 2003		7	0.72	5	0.01	19	0.13	20	0.42	3	0.66	19	0.53
Ashkenazy 1981		51	0.61	79	0.00	46	0.07	48	0.07	15	0.46	49	0.18
Bacha 2000		72	0.53	41	0.00	64	0.04	69	0.04	7	0.49	63	0.14
Badura 1965		54	0.61	6	0.01	54	0.04	70	0.04	18	0.47	70	0.14
Barbosa 1983		64	0.55	54	0.00	58	0.05	60	0.05	16	0.53	56	0.16
Biret 1990		38	0.65	18	0.00	25	0.08	22	0.36	10	0.52	27	0.43
Blet 2003		42	0.64	12	0.01	48	0.06	53	0.06	2	0.67	48	0.20
Block 1995		59	0.57	19	0.00	32	0.05	41	0.17	5	0.61	39	0.32
Blumental 1952		50	0.61	24	0.00	47	0.07	47	0.07	12	0.41	53	0.17
Boshniakovich 1969		12	0.71	2	0.02	6	0.10	7	0.54	4	0.64	5	0.59
Brailowsky 1960		34	0.65	3	0.02	29	0.09	38	0.19	1	0.78	31	0.38
Bunin 1987		77	0.50	87	0.00	73	0.06	50	0.06	14	0.48	54	0.17
Bunin 1987b		81	0.49	67	0.00	72	0.04	71	0.04	13	0.48	64	0.14
Chiu 1999		61	0.57	55	0.00	65	0.04	65	0.04	9	0.40	73	0.13
Cohen 1997		88	0.38	76	0.00	88	0.04	72	0.04	38	0.13	86	0.07
Cortot 1951		71	0.53	88	0.00	71	0.04	63	0.04	12	0.56	61	0.15
Csalog 1996		74	0.52	7	0.01	68	0.05	54	0.05	16	0.42	68	0.14
Czerny 1949		22	0.69	80	0.00	24	0.08	21	0.37	18	0.54	25	0.45
Czerny 1990		26	0.69	47	0.00	34	0.06	32	0.23	15	0.50	36	0.34
Duchoud 2007		76	0.50	49	0.00	61	0.04	80	0.04	9	0.48	69	0.14
Ezaki 2006		19	0.70	16	0.00	35	0.07	33	0.22	10	0.61	33	0.37
Falvay 1989		68	0.55	58	0.00	78	0.04	74	0.04	45	0.14	83	0.07
Farrell 1958		62	0.56	56	0.00	56	0.05	62	0.05	23	0.43	58	0.15
Ferenczy 1958		46	0.62	29	0.00	67	0.07	49	0.07	4	0.61	47	0.21
Fliere 1977		target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target	target
Fou 1978		27	0.68	8	0.01	23	0.08	23	0.35	2	0.64	22	0.47
Francois 1956		69	0.54	71	0.00	74	0.04	78	0.04	24	0.44	76	0.13
Friedman 1923		47	0.61	39	0.00	63	0.05	61	0.05	23	0.43	62	0.15
Friedman 1923b		49	0.61	63	0.00	62	0.04	76	0.04	29	0.42	75	0.13
Friedman 1930		45	0.62	82	0.00	66	0.05	57	0.05	26	0.44	59	0.15
Garcia 2007		53	0.61	74	0.00	53	0.05	56	0.05	3	0.61	52	0.17
Garcia 2007b		44	0.63	45	0.00	42	0.07	36	0.20	6	0.60	35	0.35
Gierzod 1998		2	0.79	11	0.01	2	0.42	2	0.75	3	0.77	2	0.76
Gornostaeva 1994		37	0.65	28	0.00	37	0.06	42	0.17	9	0.58	41	0.31
Groot 1988		56	0.60	46	0.00	30	0.05	37	0.20	3	0.59	37	0.34
Harasiewicz 1955		9	0.72	57	0.00	16	0.10	13	0.50	14	0.60	15	0.55
Hatto 1993		15	0.71	22	0.00	3	0.19	4	0.55	6	0.57	11	0.56
Hatto 1997		11	0.71	81	0.00	5	0.19	8	0.53	6	0.56	17	0.54
Horowitz 1949		67	0.55	89	0.00	70	0.04	79	0.04	11	0.51	66	0.14
Indjic 1988		10	0.72	32	0.00	4	0.14	6	0.54	6	0.56	14	0.55
Kapell 1951		30	0.68	4	0.01	15	0.11	19	0.46	4	0.61	18	0.53
Kissin 1993		31	0.67	40	0.00	41	0.07	34	0.22	23	0.50	38	0.33
Kushner 1989		16	0.71	33	0.00	22	0.08	26	0.34	11	0.61	23	0.46
Luisada 1991		8	0.72	42	0.00	17	0.10	17	0.47	2	0.76	4	0.60
Lushtak 2004		33	0.66	17	0.00	36	0.07	31	0.25	6	0.65	30	0.40
Malcuzynski 1961		60	0.57	72	0.00	57	0.05	59	0.05	18	0.41	65	0.14
Magaloff 1978		55	0.60	38	0.00	38	0.06	43	0.14	7	0.50	43	0.26
Magin 1975		6	0.72	30	0.00	18	0.16	12	0.51	4	0.64	8	0.57
Michalowski 1933		66	0.55	36	0.00	69	0.04	66	0.04	14	0.47	67	0.14
Milkina 1970		25	0.69	37	0.00	33	0.06	28	0.32	20	0.49	28	0.40
Mohovich 1999		32	0.67	14	0.00	43	0.08	35	0.21	3	0.68	32	0.38
Moravec 1969		78	0.49	50	0.00	82	0.04	73	0.04	38	0.19	81	0.09
Morozova 2008		36	0.65	64	0.00	44	0.06	44	0.12	15	0.45	45	0.23
Neighaus 1950		41	0.64	77	0.00	45	0.06	45	0.11	17	0.51	44	0.24
Niedzielski 1931		48	0.61	65	0.00	59	0.06	52	0.06	17	0.46	50	0.17
Ohlsson 1999		28	0.68	78	0.00	14	0.11	14	0.49	7	0.62	13	0.55
Osinska 1989		3	0.74	27	0.00	7	0.10	3	0.60	4	0.73	3	0.66
Pachmann 1927		75	0.51	75	0.00	86	0.03	84	0.03	19	0.42	78	0.11
Paderewski 1930		85	0.44	59	0.00	87	0.04	77	0.04	40	0.13	85	0.07
Perlemuter 1992		52	0.61	68	0.00	52	0.04	68	0.04	5	0.59	57	0.15
Pierdomenico 2008		86	0.44	83	0.00	83	0.02	88	0.02	40	0.23	84	0.07
Poblocka 1999		18	0.70	31	0.00	12	0.12	10	0.52	3	0.65	6	0.58
Rabcewiczowa 1932		58	0.58	20	0.00	39	0.06	40	0.18	9	0.51	42	0.30
Rachmaninoff 1923		23	0.69	13	0.00	26	0.10	27	0.33	3	0.61	24	0.45
Rangell 2001		87	0.39	90	0.00	85	0.03	85	0.03	52	0.05	88	0.04
Richter 1976		39	0.64	34	0.00	50	0.08	46	0.08	9	0.61	46	0.22
Rosen 1989		13	0.71	73	0.00	20	0.11	18	0.47	3	0.71	7	0.58
Rosenthal 1930		63	0.56	62	0.00	75	0.04	67	0.04	11	0.56	60	0.15
Rosenthal 1931		82	0.48	51	0.00	81	0.03	81	0.03	23	0.39	79	0.11
Rosenthal 1931b		79	0.49	35	0.00	80	0.03	82	0.03	20	0.45	77	0.12
Rosenthal 1931c		70	0.54	60	0.00	76	0.05	55	0.05	9	0.59	55	0.17
Rosenthal 1931d		84	0.47	61	0.00	79	0.02	87	0.02	26	0.40	82	0.09
Rossi 2007		83	0.48	66	0.00	84	0.03	86	0.03	47	0.08	87	0.05
Rubinstein 1939		57	0.59	91	0.00	60	0.04	75	0.04	15	0.41	74	0.13
Rubinstein 1952		73	0.52	21	0.00	51	0.05	58	0.05	24	0.41	71	0.14
Rubinstein 1966		40	0.64	43	0.00	49	0.06	51	0.06	24	0.46	51	0.17
Schilhawsky 1960		4	0.74	10	0.01	10	0.09	11	0.52	8	0.60	10	0.56
Shebanova 2002		14	0.71	44	0.00	8	0.13	5	0.54	6	0.61	9	0.57
Smith 1975		20	0.70	9	0.01	28	0.08	24	0.35	2	0.73	21	0.51
Sokolov 2002		65	0.55	23	0.00	55	0.04	64	0.04	17	0.42	72	0.13
Sztompka 1959		17	0.71	26	0.00	9	0.10	9	0.52	11	0.59	12	0.55
Tomsic 1995		80	0.49	69	0.00	77	0.03	83	0.03	34	0.33	80	0.10
Uninsky 1932		43	0.64	25	0.00	40	0.06	39	0.18	9	0.55	40	0.31
Uninsky 1971		24	0.69	53	0.00	11	0.09	15	0.48	12	0.61	16	0.54
Wasowski 1980		35	0.65	15	0.00	31	0.06	30	0.25	10	0.54	34	0.37
Zak 1937		21	0.69	84	0.00	21	0.09	25	0.35	10	0.55	26	0.44
Zak 1951		29	0.68	52	0.00	27	0.10	29	0.31	12	0.52	29	0.40
Average		1	0.87	1	0.80	1	0.79	1	0.89	2	0.74	1	0.81
Random 1		91	-0.10	85	0.00	90	0.01	90	0.01	47	0.04	91	0.02
Random 2		90	-0.09	86	0.00	91	0.01	91	0.01	62	0.04	90	0.02
Random 3		89	-0.07	70	0.00	89	0.01	89	0.01	40	0.12	89	0.03

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).