MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411505346 · doi:10.1016/j.visres.2025.108641

CNN-extracted features generate synthetic fMRI responses to unseen images

2025· article· en· W4411505346 on OpenAlexafffund
Parsa Delavari, Leonid Sigal, İpek Oruç

Bibliographic record

VenueVision Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inspired by biological vision, convolutional neural networks (CNNs) have tackled challenging image recognition problems once considered the sole purview of human expertise. In turn, CNNs are now widely used as a framework for studying human vision. The organizational similarity between the layers of CNNs and cortical regions along the visual pathway has been shown in studies using human fMRI data, such that early visual areas' activities are better predicted by the first layers of CNNs while their last layers better predict the response of higher-level visual areas. However, there is a lack of agreement on how well CNN features can predict fMRI responses, particularly in the presence of fMRI noise, which can result in varying brain responses to the repetitions of the same image. Additionally, the utility of these predicted responses to previously unseen images as synthetic fMRI data has not yet been explored. Here we use the BOLD5000 dataset and the AlexNet architecture initialized with the model weights pre-trained on ImageNet to show that features extracted by CNNs can g enerate highly accurate synthetic fMRI responses to images. We demonstrate that synthetic fMRI responses show higher correlations with repetitions of real responses than the real responses themselves, surpassing the quality of real data in the presence of noise. Moreover, we train a decoder with synthetic fMRI data to classify real fMRI data for unseen images and even unseen object categories. Our decoding experiments revealed that the synthetic data outperformed real data, particularly due to the ability to generate larger synthetic datasets. Our findings showcase the high quality of generated synthetic fMRI responses to images based on CNN features, exhibiting both similarities to real data and practical utility in empirical applications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.394 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVision ResearchSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207