ReviewBiology2023
Evaluation of the Hierarchical Correspondence between the Human Brain and Artificial Neural Networks: A Review.
Review in Biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A densely sampled fMRI dataset for investigating food valuation.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience: Transformative Synergies in Brain Research and Clinical Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- An Introduction to Generative Artificial Intelligence for Academics.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Artificial neural networks (ANNs) that are heavily inspired by the human brain now achieve human-level performance across multiple task domains. ANNs have thus drawn attention in neuroscience, raising the possibility of providing a framework for understanding the information encoded in the human brain. However, the correspondence between ANNs and the brain cannot be measured directly. They differ in outputs and substrates, neurons vastly outnumber their ANN analogs (i.e., nodes), and the key algorithm responsible for most of modern ANN training (i.e., backpropagation) is likely absent from the brain. Neuroscientists have thus taken a variety of approaches to examine the similarity between the brain and ANNs at multiple levels of their information hierarchy. This review provides an overview of the currently available approaches and their limitations for evaluating brain-ANN correspondence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.