Sample stimuli

sample 0 sample 1 sample 2 sample 3 sample 4 sample 5 sample 6 sample 7 sample 8 sample 9

How to use

from brainscore_vision import load_benchmark
benchmark = load_benchmark("Baker2022frankenstein-accuracy_delta")
score = benchmark(my_model)

Model scores

Min Alignment Max Alignment

Rank

Model

Score

1
.983
2
.974
3
.972
4
.939
5
.929
6
.929
7
.929
8
.899
9
.897
10
.889
11
.887
12
.874
13
.873
14
.867
15
.867
16
.865
17
.862
18
.858
19
.855
20
.854
21
.850
22
.844
23
.824
24
.806
25
.803
26
.801
27
.798
28
.793
29
.775
30
.770
31
.767
32
.767
33
.766
34
.766
35
.761
36
.754
37
.741
38
.731
39
.731
40
.730
41
.727
42
.724
43
.717
44
.715
45
.714
46
.713
47
.712
48
.698
49
.696
50
.692
51
.681
52
.680
53
.671
54
.666
55
.662
56
.658
57
.645
58
.644
59
.641
60
.623
61
.617
62
.608
63
.607
64
.599
65
.578
66
.572
67
.568
68
.568
69
.567
70
.558
71
.545
72
.539
73
.536
74
.527
75
.523
76
.503
77
.503
78
.494
79
.487
80
.485
81
.485
82
.465
83
.464
84
.463
85
.463
86
.462
87
.457
88
.454
89
.453
90
.448
91
.448
92
.448
93
.435
94
.427
95
.420
96
.418
97
.410
98
.398
99
.395
100
.378
101
.374
102
.372
103
.365
104
.365
105
.362
106
.343
107
.339
108
.335
109
.335
110
.335
111
.334
112
.314
113
.313
114
.310
115
.308
116
.305
117
.301
118
.288
119
.286
120
.284
121
.282
122
.278
123
.276
124
.270
125
.270
126
.257
127
.232
128
.232
129
.220
130
.212
131
.204
132
.201
133
.160
134
.156
135
.155
136
.142
137
.135
138
.131
139
.119
140
.111
141
.096
142
.089
143
.042
144
.038
145
.028
146
.007
147
.006
148
.003
149
.002
150
.000
151
.000
152
.000
153
.000
154
.000
155
.000
156
.000
157
.000
158
.000
159
.000
160
.000
161
.000
162
.000
163
.000
164
.000
165
.000
166
.000
167
.000
168
.000
169
.000
170
.000
171
.000
172
.000
173
.000
174
.000
175
.000
176
.000
177
.000
178
.000
179
.000
180
.000
181
.000
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260

Benchmark bibtex

@article{BAKER2022104913,
                title = {Deep learning models fail to capture the configural nature of human shape perception},
                journal = {iScience},
                volume = {25},
                number = {9},
                pages = {104913},
                year = {2022},
                issn = {2589-0042},
                doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104913},
                url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589004222011853},
                author = {Nicholas Baker and James H. Elder},
                keywords = {Biological sciences, Neuroscience, Sensory neuroscience},
                abstract = {Summary
                A hallmark of human object perception is sensitivity to the holistic configuration of the local shape features of an object. Deep convolutional neural networks (DCNNs) are currently the dominant models for object recognition processing in the visual cortex, but do they capture this configural sensitivity? To answer this question, we employed a dataset of animal silhouettes and created a variant of this dataset that disrupts the configuration of each object while preserving local features. While human performance was impacted by this manipulation, DCNN performance was not, indicating insensitivity to object configuration. Modifications to training and architecture to make networks more brain-like did not lead to configural processing, and none of the networks were able to accurately predict trial-by-trial human object judgements. We speculate that to match human configural sensitivity, networks must be trained to solve a broader range of object tasks beyond category recognition.}
        }

Ceiling

Not available

Data: Baker2022frankenstein

Metric: accuracy_delta