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
.623
6
.617
7
.608
8
.607
9
.606
10
.600
11
.600
12
.596
13
.594
14
.593
15
.590
16
.588
17
.585
18
.585
19
.584
20
.584
21
.581
22
.575
23
.573
24
.573
25
.573
26
.573
27
.570
28
.564
29
.564
30
.564
31
.563
32
.563
33
.562
34
.561
35
.561
36
.561
37
.560
38
.560
39
.560
40
.560
41
.558
42
.555
43
.555
44
.555
45
.554
46
.554
47
.554
48
.551
49
.549
50
.549
51
.549
52
.549
53
.549
54
.546
55
.546
56
.546
57
.545
58
.545
59
.545
60
.545
61
.543
62
.543
63
.542
64
.541
65
.541
66
.541
67
.540
68
.540
69
.539
70
.538
71
.537
72
.537
73
.537
74
.537
75
.536
76
.536
77
.536
78
.535
79
.535
80
.534
81
.534
82
.534
83
.534
84
.533
85
.533
86
.532
87
.532
88
.531
89
.530
90
.528
91
.528
92
.528
93
.528
94
.528
95
.528
96
.527
97
.527
98
.527
99
.526
100
.526
101
.524
102
.524
103
.524
104
.523
105
.523
106
.523
107
.522
108
.522
109
.521
110
.521
111
.521
112
.521
113
.520
114
.520
115
.520
116
.520
117
.519
118
.518
119
.518
120
.517
121
.517
122
.515
123
.515
124
.515
125
.515
126
.515
127
.514
128
.513
129
.513
130
.513
131
.512
132
.512
133
.512
134
.511
135
.511
136
.511
137
.511
138
.510
139
.509
140
.509
141
.508
142
.508
143
.507
144
.507
145
.506
146
.505
147
.505
148
.504
149
.503
150
.503
151
.503
152
.503
153
.503
154
.502
155
.502
156
.502
157
.500
158
.500
159
.500
160
.500
161
.499
162
.499
163
.499
164
.499
165
.499
166
.498
167
.498
168
.497
169
.496
170
.496
171
.495
172
.494
173
.493
174
.492
175
.491
176
.490
177
.488
178
.488
179
.488
180
.488
181
.487
182
.485
183
.484
184
.481
185
.481
186
.480
187
.480
188
.479
189
.478
190
.478
191
.478
192
.477
193
.477
194
.477
195
.476
196
.475
197
.475
198
.475
199
.474
200
.474
201
.474
202
.474
203
.473
204
.472
205
.472
206
.471
207
.470
208
.470
209
.469
210
.466
211
.465
212
.464
213
.462
214
.461
215
.461
216
.458
217
.458
218
.456
219
.456
220
.454
221
.454
222
.452
223
.451
224
.451
225
.449
226
.449
227
.448
228
.448
229
.448
230
.447
231
.447
232
.447
233
.446
234
.446
235
.445
236
.445
237
.445
238
.444
239
.443
240
.443
241
.441
242
.440
243
.438
244
.438
245
.437
246
.437
247
.437
248
.435
249
.434
250
.433
251
.433
252
.428
253
.428
254
.427
255
.425
256
.425
257
.424
258
.424
259
.419
260
.415
261
.413
262
.413
263
.410
264
.410
265
.410
266
.408
267
.407
268
.406
269
.405
270
.396
271
.395
272
.392
273
.386
274
.383
275
.381
276
.376
277
.375
278
.373
279
.372
280
.371
281
.370
282
.370
283
.370
284
.370
285
.370
286
.370
287
.370
288
.370
289
.370
290
.370
291
.370
292
.370
293
.370
294
.367
295
.366
296
.365
297
.363
298
.362
299
.360
300
.359
301
.356
302
.354
303
.351
304
.348
305
.346
306
.344
307
.341
308
.341
309
.335
310
.334
311
.333
312
.333
313
.332
314
.330
315
.330
316
.324
317
.322
318
.320
319
.311
320
.310
321
.307
322
.305
323
.291
324
.286
325
.286
326
.285
327
.284
328
.283
329
.279
330
.276
331
.276
332
.270
333
.270
334
.265
335
.263
336
.261
337
.256
338
.256
339
.256
340
.256
341
.256
342
.256
343
.256
344
.256
345
.256
346
.255
347
.254
348
.250
349
.245
350
.243
351
.243
352
.242
353
.231
354
.226
355
.225
356
.220
357
.219
358
.216
359
.211
360
.211
361
.209
362
.209
363
.208
364
.200
365
.187
366
.186
367
.185
368
.177
369
.167
370
.165
371
.161
372
.160
373
.157
374
.150
375
.148
376
.144
377
.137
378
.131
379
.129
380
.127
381
.116
382
.114
383
.113
384
.112
385
.108
386
.108
387
.104
388
.103
389
.103
390
.102
391
.101
392
.098
393
.096
394
.095
395
.092
396
.090
397
.083
398
.083
399
.083
400
.082
401
.078
402
.076
403
.075
404
.067
405
.065
406
.061
407
.060
408
.054
409
.049
410
.046
411
.045
412
.041
413
.032
414
.027
415
.023
416
.020
417
.020
418
.014
419
.014
420
.012
421
.010
422
.009
423
.009
424
.009
425
.004
426
-0.002
427
-0.006
428
-0.006
429
-0.010
430
-0.016
431
-0.053
432
-0.053
433
-0.055
434
-0.067
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449

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