Yuval Golbari

Navve Wasserman, Matias Cosarinsky, Yuval Golbari et al.

Understanding how the human brain represents visual concepts, and in which brain regions these representations are encoded, remains a long-standing challenge. Decades of work have advanced our understanding of visual representations, yet brain signals remain large and complex, and the space of possible visual concepts is vast. As a result, most studies remain small-scale, rely on manual inspection, focus on specific regions and properties, and rarely include systematic validation. We present a large-scale, automated framework for discovering and explaining visual representations across the human cortex. Our method comprises two main stages. First, we discover candidate interpretable patterns in fMRI activity through unsupervised, data-driven decomposition methods. Next, we explain each pattern by identifying the set of natural images that most strongly elicit it and generating a natural-language description of their shared visual meaning. To scale this process, we introduce an automated pipeline that tests multiple candidate explanations, assigns quantitative reliability scores, and selects the most consistent description for each voxel pattern. Our framework reveals thousands of interpretable patterns spanning many distinct visual concepts, including fine-grained representations previously unreported.

Yuval Golbari, Navve Wasserman, Matias Cosarinsky et al.

Identifying which brain regions represent a visual concept in the human brain is a central challenge in neuroscience. Existing approaches have localized coarse functional regions (e.g., faces, places) through activation maximization, identifying regions that activate strongly for a target concept relative to other concepts. Yet strong activation alone does not establish that a region represents the concept itself, as responses may instead be driven by correlated visual or semantic cues. We introduce BrainCause, an automated framework that combines generative and brain models to synthesize controlled stimuli and validate neural representations through targeted causal testing. Given a query specifying a concept of interest, our framework constructs targeted stimulus sets comprising concept images, counterfactual edits that remove the target concept while preserving other image content, and images with candidate correlated distractors. It then uses an image-to-fMRI encoding model to predict brain responses and searches for representations that respond specifically to the target concept over correlated alternatives. BrainCause returns validated candidate representations and proposes follow-up fMRI experiments to further test or extend its discoveries. Our approach successfully recovers known functional localizations and identifies new candidate representations across dozens of concepts, validated on both predicted and measured fMRI data. Critically, we show that without causal validation, a large fraction of localizations would be false positives, confirming that activation alone is insufficient evidence of representation.

Yuval Golbari, Navve Wasserman, Gal Vardi et al.

Determining which data samples were used to train a model-known as Membership Inference Attack (MIA)-is a well-studied and important problem with implications for data privacy. Black-box methods presume access only to the model's outputs and often rely on training auxiliary reference models. While they have shown strong empirical performance, they rely on assumptions that rarely hold in real-world settings: (i) the attacker knows the training hyperparameters; (ii) all available non-training samples come from the same distribution as the training data; and (iii) the fraction of training data in the evaluation set is known. In this paper, we demonstrate that removing these assumptions leads to a significant drop in the performance of black-box attacks. We introduce ImpMIA, a Membership Inference Attack that exploits the Implicit Bias of neural networks, hence removes the need to rely on any reference models and their assumptions. ImpMIA is a white-box attack -- a setting which assumes access to model weights and is becoming increasingly realistic given that many models are publicly available (e.g., via Hugging Face). Building on maximum-margin implicit bias theory, ImpMIA uses the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) optimality conditions to identify training samples. This is done by finding the samples whose gradients most strongly reconstruct the trained model's parameters. As a result, ImpMIA achieves state-of-the-art performance compared to both black and white box attacks in realistic settings where only the model weights and a superset of the training data are available.