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("Rajalingham2018-i2n")
score = benchmark(my_model)

Model scores

Min Alignment Max Alignment

Rank

Model

Score

1
.664
2
.652
3
.646
4
.625
5
.624
6
.623
7
.617
8
.608
9
.607
10
.607
11
.606
12
.600
13
.600
14
.596
15
.594
16
.593
17
.590
18
.588
19
.586
20
.585
21
.585
22
.584
23
.584
24
.584
25
.582
26
.581
27
.579
28
.579
29
.578
30
.578
31
.578
32
.578
33
.577
34
.576
35
.575
36
.574
37
.573
38
.573
39
.573
40
.573
41
.572
42
.570
43
.570
44
.568
45
.566
46
.564
47
.564
48
.564
49
.563
50
.563
51
.562
52
.561
53
.561
54
.561
55
.560
56
.560
57
.560
58
.560
59
.558
60
.558
61
.555
62
.555
63
.555
64
.555
65
.555
66
.554
67
.554
68
.554
69
.552
70
.551
71
.549
72
.549
73
.549
74
.549
75
.549
76
.549
77
.546
78
.546
79
.546
80
.545
81
.545
82
.545
83
.545
84
.543
85
.543
86
.542
87
.541
88
.541
89
.541
90
.541
91
.540
92
.540
93
.539
94
.538
95
.537
96
.537
97
.537
98
.537
99
.536
100
.536
101
.536
102
.535
103
.535
104
.534
105
.534
106
.534
107
.534
108
.534
109
.533
110
.533
111
.532
112
.532
113
.531
114
.530
115
.528
116
.528
117
.528
118
.528
119
.528
120
.528
121
.527
122
.527
123
.527
124
.526
125
.526
126
.526
127
.524
128
.524
129
.524
130
.523
131
.523
132
.523
133
.523
134
.522
135
.522
136
.521
137
.521
138
.521
139
.521
140
.521
141
.521
142
.520
143
.520
144
.520
145
.520
146
.519
147
.518
148
.518
149
.517
150
.517
151
.516
152
.515
153
.515
154
.515
155
.515
156
.515
157
.514
158
.513
159
.513
160
.513
161
.512
162
.512
163
.512
164
.512
165
.511
166
.511
167
.511
168
.511
169
.511
170
.510
171
.510
172
.509
173
.509
174
.508
175
.508
176
.507
177
.507
178
.506
179
.505
180
.505
181
.504
182
.503
183
.503
184
.503
185
.503
186
.503
187
.503
188
.502
189
.502
190
.502
191
.500
192
.500
193
.500
194
.500
195
.499
196
.499
197
.499
198
.499
199
.499
200
.499
201
.498
202
.498
203
.497
204
.496
205
.496
206
.495
207
.494
208
.494
209
.493
210
.493
211
.492
212
.491
213
.490
214
.488
215
.488
216
.488
217
.488
218
.487
219
.487
220
.485
221
.484
222
.482
223
.481
224
.481
225
.480
226
.480
227
.480
228
.479
229
.479
230
.478
231
.478
232
.478
233
.477
234
.477
235
.477
236
.476
237
.475
238
.475
239
.475
240
.474
241
.474
242
.474
243
.474
244
.473
245
.472
246
.472
247
.471
248
.470
249
.470
250
.469
251
.466
252
.465
253
.464
254
.462
255
.461
256
.461
257
.458
258
.458
259
.456
260
.456
261
.454
262
.454
263
.452
264
.451
265
.451
266
.450
267
.449
268
.449
269
.448
270
.448
271
.448
272
.448
273
.447
274
.447
275
.447
276
.446
277
.446
278
.445
279
.445
280
.445
281
.444
282
.443
283
.443
284
.441
285
.440
286
.438
287
.438
288
.437
289
.437
290
.437
291
.435
292
.435
293
.434
294
.434
295
.433
296
.433
297
.430
298
.428
299
.428
300
.427
301
.426
302
.425
303
.425
304
.425
305
.424
306
.424
307
.419
308
.417
309
.415
310
.413
311
.413
312
.410
313
.410
314
.410
315
.409
316
.408
317
.407
318
.407
319
.407
320
.406
321
.405
322
.403
323
.401
324
.396
325
.395
326
.392
327
.390
328
.386
329
.384
330
.383
331
.381
332
.376
333
.375
334
.373
335
.372
336
.372
337
.371
338
.370
339
.370
340
.370
341
.370
342
.370
343
.368
344
.367
345
.366
346
.365
347
.363
348
.362
349
.361
350
.360
351
.360
352
.358
353
.356
354
.355
355
.354
356
.351
357
.348
358
.348
359
.346
360
.344
361
.341
362
.341
363
.335
364
.334
365
.333
366
.333
367
.333
368
.332
369
.330
370
.324
371
.324
372
.323
373
.322
374
.320
375
.315
376
.311
377
.310
378
.307
379
.307
380
.306
381
.305
382
.292
383
.292
384
.291
385
.286
386
.286
387
.285
388
.284
389
.283
390
.279
391
.278
392
.276
393
.276
394
.272
395
.270
396
.270
397
.267
398
.265
399
.263
400
.262
401
.261
402
.259
403
.256
404
.256
405
.256
406
.256
407
.256
408
.256
409
.256
410
.256
411
.256
412
.255
413
.254
414
.253
415
.251
416
.250
417
.247
418
.245
419
.244
420
.243
421
.243
422
.242
423
.234
424
.231
425
.226
426
.225
427
.220
428
.219
429
.216
430
.211
431
.211
432
.209
433
.209
434
.208
435
.200
436
.187
437
.186
438
.177
439
.167
440
.167
441
.165
442
.161
443
.160
444
.157
445
.157
446
.156
447
.150
448
.148
449
.144
450
.137
451
.131
452
.129
453
.127
454
.119
455
.116
456
.114
457
.113
458
.112
459
.108
460
.108
461
.107
462
.104
463
.104
464
.103
465
.103
466
.102
467
.101
468
.098
469
.096
470
.095
471
.092
472
.090
473
.090
474
.084
475
.084
476
.083
477
.083
478
.082
479
.078
480
.076
481
.075
482
.071
483
.071
484
.067
485
.065
486
.065
487
.061
488
.060
489
.060
490
.057
491
.054
492
.054
493
.049
494
.048
495
.047
496
.046
497
.046
498
.045
499
.045
500
.043
501
.041
502
.040
503
.032
504
.030
505
.027
506
.023
507
.020
508
.020
509
.014
510
.014
511
.012
512
.011
513
.011
514
.010
515
.009
516
.009
517
.009
518
.004
519
.000
520
.000
521
.000
522
.000
523
.000
524
.000
525
.000
526
.000
527
.000
528
.000
529
.000
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545

Benchmark bibtex

@article {Rajalingham240614,
                author = {Rajalingham, Rishi and Issa, Elias B. and Bashivan, Pouya and Kar, Kohitij and Schmidt, Kailyn and DiCarlo, James J.},
                title = {Large-scale, high-resolution comparison of the core visual object recognition behavior of humans, monkeys, and state-of-the-art deep artificial neural networks},
                elocation-id = {240614},
                year = {2018},
                doi = {10.1101/240614},
                publisher = {Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory},
                abstract = {Primates{	extemdash}including humans{	extemdash}can typically recognize objects in visual images at a glance even in the face of naturally occurring identity-preserving image transformations (e.g. changes in viewpoint). A primary neuroscience goal is to uncover neuron-level mechanistic models that quantitatively explain this behavior by predicting primate performance for each and every image. Here, we applied this stringent behavioral prediction test to the leading mechanistic models of primate vision (specifically, deep, convolutional, artificial neural networks; ANNs) by directly comparing their behavioral signatures against those of humans and rhesus macaque monkeys. Using high-throughput data collection systems for human and monkey psychophysics, we collected over one million behavioral trials for 2400 images over 276 binary object discrimination tasks. Consistent with previous work, we observed that state-of-the-art deep, feed-forward convolutional ANNs trained for visual categorization (termed DCNNIC models) accurately predicted primate patterns of object-level confusion. However, when we examined behavioral performance for individual images within each object discrimination task, we found that all tested DCNNIC models were significantly non-predictive of primate performance, and that this prediction failure was not accounted for by simple image attributes, nor rescued by simple model modifications. These results show that current DCNNIC models cannot account for the image-level behavioral patterns of primates, and that new ANN models are needed to more precisely capture the neural mechanisms underlying primate object vision. To this end, large-scale, high-resolution primate behavioral benchmarks{	extemdash}such as those obtained here{	extemdash}could serve as direct guides for discovering such models.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Recently, specific feed-forward deep convolutional artificial neural networks (ANNs) models have dramatically advanced our quantitative understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying primate core object recognition. In this work, we tested the limits of those ANNs by systematically comparing the behavioral responses of these models with the behavioral responses of humans and monkeys, at the resolution of individual images. Using these high-resolution metrics, we found that all tested ANN models significantly diverged from primate behavior. Going forward, these high-resolution, large-scale primate behavioral benchmarks could serve as direct guides for discovering better ANN models of the primate visual system.},
                URL = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/02/12/240614},
                eprint = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/02/12/240614.full.pdf},
                journal = {bioRxiv}
            }

Ceiling

0.48.

Note that scores are relative to this ceiling.

Data: Rajalingham2018

240 stimuli match-to-sample task

Metric: i2n