Cognitive Alignment At No Cost: Inducing Human Attention Biases For Interpretable Vision Transformers

Visual perception depends on top-down goals and bottom-up sensory mechanisms. Vision-language models implement both, allowing us to treat each component as a separable hypothesis about what drives where we look. We compared spatial attention maps from six vision-language models against human fixation heatmaps recorded on 200 images during two tasks (general description and social captioning). The six models spanned a 2$\times$2 factorial of CNN vs.\ ViT encoders crossed with LSTM vs.\ Transformer decoders, plus Molmo 7B-D and Qwen3.5 9B. We found that both decoder and encoder architecture shaped alignment, but decoder choice dominated. LSTM vs.\ Transformer decoders increased alignment by 40--50 percentage points (80--87% vs.\ 40--59% of the human noise ceiling). In contrast, CNN vs.\ ViT encoders contributed a secondary 5--20 point advantage depending on decoder family, with CNN-LSTM the most aligned model overall (85--87%). Despite their alignment advantage, LSTM-decoder attention maps were spatially diffuse and minimally task-differentiated; ViT-Transformer, the weakest in alignment, showed the sharpest spatial concentration and strongest task differentiation. A hemispatial-neglect simulation confirmed that ablating attention impacted LSTM decoders more than Transformer decoders. In an exploratory extension using TRIBE-simulated synthetic neural responses, fixation alignment and neural relevance dissociate: CNN-Transformer attention maps better predicted synthetic brain activity despite lower fixation alignment, with attention maps best predicting early visual cortex. Together, top-down and bottom-up components trade off what they predict in behavioral and synthetic neural data.

Vision transformers (ViTs) have become the de facto standard for image encoding across many perception tasks. Despite their empirical success, it remains mechanistically unclear how they encode low-level features, given their lack of inductive biases: ViTs process information globally rather than relying on local structure. Biological visual systems, in contrast, build low-level features, such as orientation selectivity in the primary visual cortex, by combining information from small, localized regions of the visual field. These features are general-purpose representations, shared and required across multiple specialized neural pathways, unlike higher-level, task-specific semantic features. This raises the question if such biologically-grounded features arise in ViTs. In this work, we systematically study how orientation selectivity emerges in ViTs by introducing a suite of neuroscience-inspired metrics: representational similarity score (RSS), orientation recruitment score (ORS), and orientation tuning bandwidth to quantify how orientation is encoded in representational geometry and as a function of model depth. Through extensive analysis, we find that: (1) the training paradigm is the strongest determinant of orientation selectivity, with models sharing an objective, peaking at comparable relative depths regardless of scale (2) many units are orientation-selective early in training, with early-to-middle layers recruiting more such units over time, while deeper layers lose selectivity and broaden their tuning toward semantic encoding and (3) our metrics offer a mechanistic heuristic for how many layers to unfreeze for best downstream generalization. Our framework presents a way to track biologically-grounded features during ViT training, probes how desired properties are encoded in transformer representations, and builds a systematic understanding of how ViTs generalize across tasks.

Although researchers' attention is more focused on the performance of Transformer models, the interpretation of Transformer can never be ignored. Gradient is widely utilized in Transformer interpretation. From the perspective of attention and gradient, we conduct an in-depth study of Transformer interpretation and propose a method to achieve it by guiding the gradient direction, or more precisely, the attention direction. The method enables more comprehensive interpretation of feature regions, offers detail interpretation, and helps to better understand Transformer mechanism. Leveraging the difference in how Vision Transformer (ViT) and humans perceive images, we alter the class of an image in a way that is almost imperceptible to the human eye. This class rewriting phenomenon may potentially pose security risks in certain scenarios.