| c-REDUCE | PhyloGibbs [22] |  |  |
---|
Total (21) | 16 | 16 | Â | Â |
Total (15) | c-REDUCE | Â | Tree Gibbs Sampler [17] | Â |
True Positives | 11 | Â | 8 | Â |
False Positives | 3/14 (21.4%) | Â | 5/13 (38.5%) | Â |
 | c-REDUCE | PhyloCon [21] | Converge [21] | PhyloCon & Converge [21] |
Total (35) | 22 | 9 | 14 | 20 |
- The sub-tables list comparisons between c-REDUCE and several other methods. The total number of transcription factor datasets evaluated (Total) is not the same in each sub-table because results are not always reported for the complete 37 "Not-recovered" set. For Tree Gibbs Sampler, the authors report all motif predictions and the false positive rates can be compared with c-REDUCE. For that sub-table, "True positives" indicates the number of correct predictions and "False positives" indicates the number of incorrect predictions out of all predictions.