Satya Sai Srinath Namburi

Subba Reddy Oota, Anant Khandelwal, Khushbu Pahwa et al.

Understanding how humans and artificial intelligence systems predict and plan by interacting with their environment is a fundamental challenge at the intersection of neuroscience and machine learning. Most brain-encoding studies focus on aligning artificial models with brain activity during language comprehension or passive visual processing, while interactive brain-alignment studies have to date been largely limited to reinforcement-learning (RL) agents and theory-based models. To address this gap, we study brain alignment of representative models from two foundation-model families, namely vision-language models (VLMs) and large-action models (LAMs), using fMRI recordings from participants playing naturalistic Atari-style video games. Specifically, we examine how action-focused and reasoning-focused prompts shape model's internal representations and align with fMRI brain activity. First, we find that both VLMs and LAMs exhibit significantly exhibit voxel-wise encoding performance than RL baselines, with the advantage holding even under matched feature dimensionality. Second, prompt-driven gains scale with the cortical processing hierarchy: the largest improvements appear in frontal-parietal and motor-planning regions, while early visual cortex gains roughly half as much. Third, variance partitioning reveals a qualitatively different representational organization: VLM is prompt-symmetric (12.5% unique action vs. 13.6% unique reasoning), whereas LAM is prompt-asymmetric (27% unique action vs. -5% unique reasoning), with the asymmetry strongest in frontal-motor cortex. Together, these results demonstrate that action-specialized fine-tuning reorganizes multimodal representations toward action-relevant neural computations even when whole-brain prediction accuracy is statistically equivalent between VLM and LAM.

Subba Reddy Oota, Khushbu Pahwa, Prachi Jindal et al.

Recent voxel-wise multimodal brain encoding studies have shown that multimodal large language models (MLLMs) exhibit a higher degree of brain alignment compared to unimodal models in both unimodal and multimodal stimulus settings. More recently, instruction-tuned multimodal models have shown to generate task-specific representations that align strongly with brain activity. However, prior work evaluating the brain alignment of MLLMs has primarily focused on unimodal settings or relied on non-instruction-tuned multimodal models for multimodal stimuli. To address this gap, we investigated brain alignment, that is, measuring the degree of predictivity of neural activity recorded while participants were watching naturalistic movies (video along with audio) with representations derived from MLLMs. We utilized instruction-specific embeddings from six video and two audio instruction-tuned MLLMs. Experiments with 13 video task-specific instructions show that instruction-tuned video MLLMs significantly outperform non-instruction-tuned multimodal (by 15%) and unimodal models (by 20%). Our evaluation of MLLMs for both video and audio tasks using language-guided instructions shows clear disentanglement in task-specific representations from MLLMs, leading to precise differentiation of multimodal functional processing in the brain. We also find that MLLM layers align hierarchically with the brain, with early sensory areas showing strong alignment with early layers, while higher-level visual and language regions align more with middle to late layers. These findings provide clear evidence for the role of task-specific instructions in improving the alignment between brain activity and MLLMs, and open new avenues for mapping joint information processing in both the systems. We make the code publicly available [https://github.com/subbareddy248/mllm_videos].

Harit Vishwakarma, Reid, Chen et al.

Auto-labeling is an important family of techniques that produce labeled training sets with minimum manual labeling. A prominent variant, threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL), works by finding a threshold on a model's confidence scores above which it can accurately label unlabeled data points. However, many models are known to produce overconfident scores, leading to poor TBAL performance. While a natural idea is to apply off-the-shelf calibration methods to alleviate the overconfidence issue, such methods still fall short. Rather than experimenting with ad-hoc choices of confidence functions, we propose a framework for studying the \emph{optimal} TBAL confidence function. We develop a tractable version of the framework to obtain \texttt{Colander} (Confidence functions for Efficient and Reliable Auto-labeling), a new post-hoc method specifically designed to maximize performance in TBAL systems. We perform an extensive empirical evaluation of our method \texttt{Colander} and compare it against methods designed for calibration. \texttt{Colander} achieves up to 60\% improvements on coverage over the baselines while maintaining auto-labeling error below $5\%$ and using the same amount of labeled data as the baselines.