mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Modeling the Human Visual System: Comparative Insights from Response-Optimized and Task-Optimized Vision Models, Language Models, and different Readout Mechanisms

arXiv 2410.14031 ↗First posted 17 Oct 2024cs.NE cs.LGcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Over the past decade, predictive modeling of neural responses in the primate visual system has advanced significantly, largely driven by various DNN approaches. These include models optimized directly for visual recognition, cross-modal alignment through contrastive objectives, neural response prediction from scratch, and large language model embeddings.Likewise, different readout mechanisms, ranging from fully linear to spatial-feature factorized methods have been explored for mapping network activations to neural responses. Despite the diversity of these approaches, it remains unclear which method performs best across different visual regions. In this study, we systematically compare these approaches for modeling the human visual system and investigate alternative strategies to improve response predictions. Our findings reveal that for early to mid-level visual areas, response-optimized models with visual inputs offer superior prediction accuracy, while for higher visual regions, embeddings from LLMs based on detailed contextual descriptions of images and task-optimized models pretrained on large vision datasets provide the best fit. Through comparative analysis of these modeling approaches, we identified three distinct regions in the visual cortex: one sensitive primarily to perceptual features of the input that are not captured by linguistic descriptions, another attuned to fine-grained visual details representing semantic information, and a third responsive to abstract, global meanings aligned with linguistic content. We also highlight the critical role of readout mechanisms, proposing a novel scheme that modulates receptive fields and feature maps based on semantic content, resulting in an accuracy boost of 3-23% over existing SOTAs for all models and brain regions. Together, these findings offer key insights into building more precise models of the visual system.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 71 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Oct 2024.

Builds on

20 of 71 references.

References · 20

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 51,809
  2. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  3. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  4. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  5. 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,482
  6. 2022A ConvNet for the 2020scited by 3,545
  7. 2015Spatial Transformer Networkscited by 1,423
  8. 2020MPNet: Masked and Permuted Pre-training for Language Understandingcited by 973
  9. 2019General E(2)-Equivariant Steerable CNNscited by 441
  10. 2024The Platonic Representation Hypothesiscited by 362
  11. 2015Generic decoding of seen and imagined objects using hierarchical visual featurescited by 119
  12. 2014Deep Neural Networks Reveal a Gradient in the Complexity of Neural Representations across the Brain's Ventral Visual Pathwaycited by 93
8 more
  1. 2016Neural Encoding and Decoding with Deep Learning for Dynamic Natural Visioncited by 58
  2. 2019Inducing brain-relevant bias in natural language processing modelscited by 38
  3. 2023Brain encoding models based on multimodal transformers can transfer across language and visioncited by 31
  4. 2017Neural system identification for large populations separating "what" and "where"cited by 28
  5. 2021Towards robust vision by multi-task learning on monkey visual cortexcited by 28
  6. 2022Visual representations in the human brain are aligned with large language modelscited by 11
  7. 2022Beyond linear regression: mapping models in cognitive neuroscience should align with research goalscited by 10
  8. 2023UNIMO-3: Multi-granularity Interaction for Vision-Language Representation Learningcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 1.

2 papers.