Alignment of auditory artificial networks with massive individual fMRI brain data leads to generalisable improvements in brain encoding and downstream tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Artificial neural networks trained in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) have emerged as key tools to model brain processes, sparking the idea of aligning network representations with brain dynamics to enhance performance on AI tasks. While this concept has gained support in the visual domain, we investigate here the feasibility of creating auditory artificial neural models directly aligned with individual brain activity. This objective raises major computational challenges, as models have to be trained directly with brain data, which is typically collected at a much smaller scale than data used to train AI models. We aimed to answer two key questions: (1) Can brain alignment of auditory models lead to improved brain encoding for novel, previously unseen stimuli? (2) Can brain alignment lead to generalisable representations of auditory signals that are useful for solving a variety of complex auditory tasks? To answer these questions, we relied on two massive datasets: a deep phenotyping dataset from the Courtois neuronal modelling project, where six subjects watched four seasons (36 h) of the Friends TV series in functional magnetic resonance imaging and the HEAR benchmark, a large battery of downstream auditory tasks. We fine-tuned SoundNet, a small pretrained convolutional neural network with ~2.5 M parameters. Aligning SoundNet with brain data from three seasons of Friends led to substantial improvement in brain encoding in the fourth season, extending beyond auditory and visual cortices. We also observed consistent performance gains on the HEAR benchmark, particularly for tasks with limited training data, where brain-aligned models performed comparably with the best-performing models regardless of size. We finally compared individual and group models, finding that individual models often matched or outperformed group models in both brain encoding and downstream task performance, highlighting the data efficiency of fine-tuning with individual brain data. Our results demonstrate the feasibility of aligning artificial neural network representations with individual brain activity during auditory processing, and suggest that this alignment is particularly beneficial for tasks with limited training data. Future research is needed to establish whether larger models can achieve even better performance and whether the observed gains extend to other tasks, particularly in the context of few-shot learning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".