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("MajajHong2015.IT-pls")
score = benchmark(my_model)

Model scores

Min Alignment Max Alignment

Rank

Model

Score

1
.574
2
.572
3
.569
4
.568
5
.566
6
.566
7
.562
8
.561
9
.561
10
.561
11
.560
12
.560
13
.560
14
.559
15
.559
16
.559
17
.558
18
.556
19
.555
20
.555
21
.555
22
.554
23
.554
24
.554
25
.554
26
.554
27
.553
28
.553
29
.553
30
.552
31
.552
32
.552
33
.552
34
.552
35
.552
36
.551
37
.551
38
.550
39
.550
40
.550
41
.549
42
.549
43
.549
44
.549
45
.549
46
.549
47
.548
48
.548
49
.548
50
.547
51
.547
52
.547
53
.547
54
.547
55
.547
56
.546
57
.546
58
.546
59
.546
60
.545
61
.545
62
.545
63
.545
64
.545
65
.544
66
.544
67
.543
68
.543
69
.543
70
.543
71
.543
72
.543
73
.543
74
.542
75
.542
76
.541
77
.541
78
.541
79
.541
80
.541
81
.541
82
.541
83
.541
84
.541
85
.541
86
.541
87
.541
88
.540
89
.540
90
.540
91
.540
92
.539
93
.539
94
.539
95
.539
96
.539
97
.538
98
.538
99
.536
100
.536
101
.536
102
.536
103
.535
104
.535
105
.535
106
.535
107
.535
108
.535
109
.535
110
.535
111
.534
112
.534
113
.534
114
.534
115
.534
116
.534
117
.533
118
.533
119
.533
120
.533
121
.533
122
.532
123
.532
124
.532
125
.532
126
.532
127
.531
128
.531
129
.531
130
.531
131
.531
132
.531
133
.530
134
.530
135
.530
136
.530
137
.529
138
.529
139
.529
140
.528
141
.528
142
.528
143
.527
144
.527
145
.527
146
.527
147
.527
148
.527
149
.526
150
.526
151
.526
152
.525
153
.525
154
.524
155
.523
156
.523
157
.523
158
.522
159
.522
160
.521
161
.521
162
.520
163
.520
164
.520
165
.520
166
.520
167
.519
168
.519
169
.518
170
.518
171
.518
172
.518
173
.518
174
.517
175
.517
176
.517
177
.517
178
.517
179
.517
180
.517
181
.517
182
.516
183
.516
184
.516
185
.515
186
.515
187
.515
188
.515
189
.515
190
.515
191
.514
192
.513
193
.513
194
.513
195
.513
196
.512
197
.512
198
.512
199
.512
200
.512
201
.511
202
.510
203
.510
204
.510
205
.510
206
.509
207
.508
208
.508
209
.508
210
.508
211
.508
212
.508
213
.508
214
.508
215
.508
216
.508
217
.508
218
.508
219
.508
220
.507
221
.507
222
.507
223
.507
224
.506
225
.506
226
.506
227
.506
228
.506
229
.505
230
.505
231
.505
232
.504
233
.504
234
.504
235
.503
236
.503
237
.503
238
.502
239
.502
240
.501
241
.501
242
.501
243
.501
244
.501
245
.499
246
.499
247
.499
248
.499
249
.499
250
.498
251
.498
252
.496
253
.496
254
.496
255
.496
256
.495
257
.494
258
.494
259
.494
260
.493
261
.493
262
.493
263
.493
264
.492
265
.490
266
.488
267
.488
268
.487
269
.487
270
.487
271
.486
272
.485
273
.485
274
.485
275
.483
276
.483
277
.483
278
.482
279
.481
280
.480
281
.479
282
.479
283
.477
284
.477
285
.476
286
.475
287
.475
288
.474
289
.473
290
.472
291
.472
292
.472
293
.471
294
.471
295
.470
296
.470
297
.469
298
.469
299
.468
300
.467
301
.467
302
.466
303
.465
304
.464
305
.464
306
.462
307
.461
308
.461
309
.460
310
.459
311
.459
312
.458
313
.457
314
.457
315
.457
316
.456
317
.455
318
.455
319
.455
320
.455
321
.455
322
.455
323
.455
324
.455
325
.455
326
.455
327
.454
328
.452
329
.451
330
.450
331
.449
332
.447
333
.447
334
.444
335
.443
336
.443
337
.442
338
.441
339
.439
340
.437
341
.437
342
.436
343
.436
344
.435
345
.434
346
.434
347
.432
348
.425
349
.424
350
.423
351
.417
352
.414
353
.414
354
.414
355
.413
356
.411
357
.410
358
.408
359
.408
360
.406
361
.405
362
.404
363
.403
364
.401
365
.401
366
.400
367
.399
368
.395
369
.388
370
.386
371
.385
372
.382
373
.380
374
.380
375
.372
376
.371
377
.366
378
.357
379
.351
380
.351
381
.350
382
.344
383
.339
384
.332
385
.325
386
.320
387
.315
388
.307
389
.285
390
.283
391
.278
392
.275
393
.269
394
.268
395
.263
396
.260
397
.257
398
.257
399
.254
400
.252
401
.251
402
.250
403
.250
404
.246
405
.245
406
.240
407
.215
408
.215
409
.214
410
.212
411
.207
412
.206
413
.206
414
.192
415
.184
416
.174
417
.173
418
.165
419
.159
420
.142
421
.133
422
.132
423
.130
424
.122
425
.109
426
.039
427
.027
428
.026
429
.015
430
.015
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459

Benchmark bibtex

@article {Majaj13402,
            author = {Majaj, Najib J. and Hong, Ha and Solomon, Ethan A. and DiCarlo, James J.},
            title = {Simple Learned Weighted Sums of Inferior Temporal Neuronal Firing Rates Accurately Predict Human Core Object Recognition Performance},
            volume = {35},
            number = {39},
            pages = {13402--13418},
            year = {2015},
            doi = {10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5181-14.2015},
            publisher = {Society for Neuroscience},
            abstract = {To go beyond qualitative models of the biological substrate of object recognition, we ask: can a single ventral stream neuronal linking hypothesis quantitatively account for core object recognition performance over a broad range of tasks? We measured human performance in 64 object recognition tests using thousands of challenging images that explore shape similarity and identity preserving object variation. We then used multielectrode arrays to measure neuronal population responses to those same images in visual areas V4 and inferior temporal (IT) cortex of monkeys and simulated V1 population responses. We tested leading candidate linking hypotheses and control hypotheses, each postulating how ventral stream neuronal responses underlie object recognition behavior. Specifically, for each hypothesis, we computed the predicted performance on the 64 tests and compared it with the measured pattern of human performance. All tested hypotheses based on low- and mid-level visually evoked activity (pixels, V1, and V4) were very poor predictors of the human behavioral pattern. However, simple learned weighted sums of distributed average IT firing rates exactly predicted the behavioral pattern. More elaborate linking hypotheses relying on IT trial-by-trial correlational structure, finer IT temporal codes, or ones that strictly respect the known spatial substructures of IT ({	extquotedblleft}face patches{	extquotedblright}) did not improve predictive power. Although these results do not reject those more elaborate hypotheses, they suggest a simple, sufficient quantitative model: each object recognition task is learned from the spatially distributed mean firing rates (100 ms) of \~{}60,000 IT neurons and is executed as a simple weighted sum of those firing rates.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT We sought to go beyond qualitative models of visual object recognition and determine whether a single neuronal linking hypothesis can quantitatively account for core object recognition behavior. To achieve this, we designed a database of images for evaluating object recognition performance. We used multielectrode arrays to characterize hundreds of neurons in the visual ventral stream of nonhuman primates and measured the object recognition performance of \>100 human observers. Remarkably, we found that simple learned weighted sums of firing rates of neurons in monkey inferior temporal (IT) cortex accurately predicted human performance. Although previous work led us to expect that IT would outperform V4, we were surprised by the quantitative precision with which simple IT-based linking hypotheses accounted for human behavior.},
            issn = {0270-6474},
            URL = {https://www.jneurosci.org/content/35/39/13402},
            eprint = {https://www.jneurosci.org/content/35/39/13402.full.pdf},
            journal = {Journal of Neuroscience}}

Ceiling

0.82.

Note that scores are relative to this ceiling.

Data: MajajHong2015.IT

2560 stimuli recordings from 168 sites in IT

Metric: pls