Artificial neural networks trained on visual tasks develop internal representations resembling those of the primate visual system, a discovery that has guided a decade of computational neuroscience. Research on building brain-aligned models has progressively embraced finer-grained learning ob- jectives, from object classification to contrastive self-supervised objectives that maximize distinc- tions among individual images. Yet the effect of learning-signal granularity on brain alignment remains largely unexamined. Here we systematically investigate how the granularity of a learning signal shapes representational alignment with human vision. We parametrically vary the number of training classes using a data-driven approach that partitions a set of training images into differ- ent numbers of categories via PCA-based splits of pretrained embeddings. We train hundreds of neural networks across convolutional and transformer architectures on these coarse classification tasks and compare their representations with human fMRI responses, macaque electrophysiology recordings, and human behavior. We find that networks trained to distinguish as few as eight broad categories learn representations that match or exceed the neural alignment of models distinguishing 1,000 classes. Even more strikingly, these coarsely trained networks align more closely with hu- man perceptual similarity judgments than all other models evaluated, including networks trained with fine-grained supervision or self-supervision as well as leading large-scale vision models. These results demonstrate that human-like visual representations can emerge from surprisingly simple learning objectives, reframing what learning signals vision may require and opening a path toward building AI systems that are more aligned with human perception.
Random, untrained neural networks consistently match or exceed trained networks in representational similarity to early visual cortex. This puzzling finding challenges the assumption that learning improves brain alignment. We investigate it by tracking representational similarity analysis (RSA) alignment to human fMRI data across training for four learning rules: backpropagation (BP), feedback alignment (FA), predictive coding (PC), and spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP). Using 720 object images from the THINGS database and fMRI data from three subjects across six visual ROIs, we measure Spearman correlations between model and brain representational dissimilarity matrices at eight training checkpoints (epochs 0-40). We find that (1) a single epoch of training reduces V1 alignment by 25-90%, depending on the learning rule; (2) backpropagation reduces V1 alignment most severely (delta r = -0.080), while predictive coding and STDP preserve substantially more (delta r ~ -0.04); and (3) a weaker, opposite tendency appears in object-selective cortex (LOC), where BP shows the largest increase in alignment during training, although the absolute change is small. These results suggest that untrained architectures capture low-level visual statistics through inductive biases alone, and that global error signals (BP) reshape early representations more aggressively than local learning rules (PC, STDP), which better preserve brain-like structure.
A central question in computational neuroscience is whether the learning rule used to train a neural network determines how well its internal representations align with those of the human visual cortex. We present a systematic comparison of four learning rules (backpropagation (BP), feedback alignment (FA), predictive coding (PC), and spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP)) applied to identical convolutional architectures and evaluated against human fMRI data from the THINGS-fMRI dataset (720 stimuli, 3 subjects) using Representational Similarity Analysis (RSA). All models process stimuli at 224 x 224 resolution; results are averaged across 5 random seeds. Crucially, we include an untrained random-weights baseline that reveals the dominant role of architecture. At V1/V2, the untrained baseline exceeds backpropagation (rho = 0.076 vs. rho = 0.034; Delta-rho = +0.044, p < 0.001), and STDP achieves the highest V1 alignment among trained rules (rho = 0.064). At LOC, only BP reliably exceeds the random baseline (rho = 0.012 vs. -0.005, p < 0.001). At IT, all five conditions converge (rho = 0.008-0.014) with no significant pairwise differences among trained rules (p > 0.05, FDR-corrected). FA consistently produces the lowest alignment at V1, V2, and LOC (rho = 0.012 at V1, below all other conditions). Partial RSA confirms all effects survive pixel-similarity control. Seed variability is small relative to between-rule differences at V1/V2. These results demonstrate that early visual alignment is architecture-driven, learning rules differentiate only at intermediate areas, and all rules converge at the highest levels of the hierarchy.
Biological visual systems learn from limited experience, unlike deep learning models that rely on millions of training images. What learning principles make this possible? We tested whether efficient coding, the idea that neural representations capture the statistical structure of natural inputs, can build a hierarchy of human-aligned visual features from limited data. We developed an unsupervised learning procedure in which each layer of a deep network compresses its inputs onto the dominant modes of variation in natural images, using only local statistics and no labels, tasks, or backpropagation. This unsupervised procedure yields features that progress from edges and colors to textures and shapes. The features of this deep efficient coding model are readily recognized by human observers and are predictive of image-evoked fMRI responses in human visual cortex. Furthermore, a hybrid learning procedure that combines efficient coding with supervised fine-tuning yields better brain alignment in low-data settings and more rapid category learning. These findings suggest that efficient coding may shape representations across the entire visual hierarchy and help explain the data efficiency of biological vision.
Ananya Passi, Brian S. Robinson, Michael F. Bonner