Neural responses in early, but not late, visual cortex are well predicted by random-weight CNNs with sufficient model complexity
Abstract
Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) were inspired by the organization of the primate visual system, and in turn have become effective models of the visual cortex, allowing for accurate predictions of neural stimulus responses. While training CNNs on brain-relevant object-recognition tasks may be an important pre-requisite to predict brain activity, the CNNs brain-like architecture alone may already allow for accurate prediction of neural activity. Here, we evaluated the performance of both task-optimized and brain-optimized convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in predicting neural responses across visual cortex, and performed systematic architectural manipulations and comparisons between trained and untrained feature extractors to reveal key structural components influencing model performance. For human and monkey area V1, random-weight CNNs employing the ReLU activation function, combined with either average or max pooling, significantly outperformed other activation functions. Random-weight CNNs matched their trained counterparts in predicting V1 responses. The extent to which V1 responses can be predicted correlated strongly with the neural networks complexity, which reflects the non-linearity of neural activation functions and pooling operations. However, this correlation between encoding performance and complexity was significantly weaker for higher visual areas that are classically associated with object recognition, such as monkey IT. To test whether this difference between visual areas reflects functional differences, we trained neural network models on both texture discrimination and object recognition tasks. Consistent with our hypothesis, model complexity correlated more strongly with performance on texture discrimination than object recognition. Our findings indicate that random-weight CNNs with sufficient model complexity allow for comparable prediction of V1 activity as trained CNNs, while higher visual areas require precise weight configurations acquired through training via gradient descent.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- Organism
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Convolutional neural network models of V1 responses to complex patterns
Yimeng Zhang, Tai Sing Lee, … Shiming Tang·Journal of Computational NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Jun 5, 2018
- A performance-optimized model of neural responses across the ventral visual stream
Darren Seibert, Daniel Yamins, … Justin L. Gardner·bioRxiv·Jan 12, 2016
- Deep convolutional models improve predictions of macaque V1 responses to natural images
Santiago A. Cadena, George H. Denfield, … Alexander S. Ecker·PLoS Computational BiologyPeer-reviewed·Apr 23, 2019
- Characterizing the temporal dynamics of object recognition by deep neural networks: role of depth
Kandan Ramakrishnan, Iris I. A. Groen, … S. Ghebreab·bioRxiv·Sep 10, 2017
- Estimating receptive fields of simple and complex cells in early visual cortex: A convolutional neural network model with parameterized rectification
Philippe Nguyen, Jinani Sooriyaarachchi, … Curtis L. Baker·PLoS Computational BiologyPeer-reviewed·May 31, 2024
- Limited correspondence in visual representation between the human brain and convolutional neural networks
Yaoda Xu A, Maryam Vaziri-Pashkam·Nature CommunicationsPeer-reviewed·Apr 6, 2021