Alex Murphy

Cory Efird, Alex Murphy, Joel Zylberberg et al.

We introduce a method that takes advantage of high-quality pretrained multimodal representations to explore fine-grained semantic networks in the human brain. Previous studies have documented evidence of functional localization in the brain, with different anatomical regions preferentially activating for different types of sensory input. Many such localized structures are known, including the fusiform face area and parahippocampal place area. This raises the question of whether additional brain regions (or conjunctions of brain regions) are also specialized for other important semantic concepts. To identify such brain regions, we developed a data-driven approach to uncover visual concepts that are decodable from a massive functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) dataset. Our analysis is broadly split into three sections. First, a fully connected neural network is trained to map brain responses to the outputs of an image-language foundation model, CLIP (Radford et al., 2021). Subsequently, a contrastive-learning dimensionality reduction method reveals the brain-decodable components of CLIP space. In the final section of our analysis, we localize shared decodable concepts in the brain using a voxel-masking optimization method to produce a shared decodable concept (SDC) space. The accuracy of our procedure is validated by comparing it to previous localization experiments that identify regions for faces, bodies, and places. In addition to these concepts, whose corresponding brain regions were already known, we localize novel concept representations which are shared across participants to other areas of the human brain. We also demonstrate how this method can be used to inspect fine-grained semantic networks for individual participants. We envisage that this extensible method can also be adapted to explore other questions at the intersection of AI and neuroscience.

Alex Murphy, Joel Zylberberg, Alona Fyshe

Centred Kernel Alignment (CKA) has recently emerged as a popular metric to compare activations from biological and artificial neural networks (ANNs) in order to quantify the alignment between internal representations derived from stimuli sets (e.g. images, text, video) that are presented to both systems. In this paper we highlight issues that the community should take into account if using CKA as an alignment metric with neural data. Neural data are in the low-data high-dimensionality domain, which is one of the cases where (biased) CKA results in high similarity scores even for pairs of random matrices. Using fMRI and MEG data from the THINGS project, we show that if biased CKA is applied to representations of different sizes in the low-data high-dimensionality domain, they are not directly comparable due to biased CKA's sensitivity to differing feature-sample ratios and not stimuli-driven responses. This situation can arise both when comparing a pre-selected area of interest (e.g. ROI) to multiple ANN layers, as well as when determining to which ANN layer multiple regions of interest (ROIs) / sensor groups of different dimensionality are most similar. We show that biased CKA can be artificially driven to its maximum value when using independent random data of different sample-feature ratios. We further show that shuffling sample-feature pairs of real neural data does not drastically alter biased CKA similarity in comparison to unshuffled data, indicating an undesirable lack of sensitivity to stimuli-driven neural responses. Positive alignment of true stimuli-driven responses is only achieved by using debiased CKA. Lastly, we report findings that suggest biased CKA is sensitive to the inherent structure of neural data, only differing from shuffled data when debiased CKA detects stimuli-driven alignment.

Rohan Saha, Abrar Fahim, Alona Fyshe et al.

For specialized domains, there is often not a wealth of data with which to train large machine learning models. In such limited data / compute settings, various methods exist aiming to $\textit{do more with less}$, such as finetuning from a pretrained model, modulating difficulty levels as data are presented to a model (curriculum learning), and considering the role of model type / size. Approaches to efficient $\textit{machine}$ learning also take inspiration from $\textit{human}$ learning by considering use cases where machine learning systems have access to approximately the same number of words experienced by a 13 year old child (100M words). We investigate the role of 3 primary variables in a limited data regime as part of the multimodal track of the BabyLM challenge. We contrast: (i) curriculum learning, (ii), pretraining (with text-only data), (iii) model type. We modulate these variables and assess them on two types of tasks: (a) multimodal (text+image), and (b) unimodal (text-only) tasks. We find that curriculum learning benefits multimodal evaluations over non-curriclum learning models, particularly when combining text-only pretraining. On text-only tasks, curriculum learning appears to help models with smaller trainable parameter counts. We suggest possible reasons based on architectural differences and training designs as to why one might observe such results.