Artificial Intelligence · 17.08.2026, 08:55 UTC
Untrained CNNs Match Backpropagation at V1: A Systematic RSA Comparison of Four Learning Rules Against Human fMRI
| Schweregrad | info |
|---|---|
| Kategorie | Artificial Intelligence |
| Quelle | arXiv cs.LG ↗ |
| Veröffentlicht | 17.08.2026 UTC |
Sicherheitsmeldung mit Schweregrad noch nicht bewertet. Technische Details im Tab „Originaltext“; empfohlene Schritte in der Checkliste.
arXiv:2604.16875v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: CORRECTION (August 2026): an evaluation-mode defect affected the predictive-coding and STDP conditions of this study; those results should not be used pending re-computation. At V1 and 224px, predictive coding falls from rho = 0.056 to 0.016 and STDP from 0.064 to 0.037, so the claims that STDP leads among trained rules and that PC and STDP lead at V1/V2 are not supported. The random, backpropagation and feedback-alignment conditions, which carry the untrained-versus-trained claim, are unchanged to within 0.0013. The result is however strongly dependent on the evaluation resolution, held fixed at 224px here; see arXiv:2608.12408. See the correction note on page 1; the original abstract below and the body are unchanged from v1. 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 …