ArticleArXiv2025
Mouse vs. AI: A Neuroethological Benchmark for Visual Robustness and Neural Alignment.
Article in ArXiv, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Visual robustness under real-world conditions remains a critical bottleneck for modern reinforcement learning agents. In contrast, biological systems such as mice show remarkable resilience to environmental changes, maintaining stable performance even under degraded visual input with minimal exposure. Inspired by this gap, we propose the Mouse vs. AI: Robust Foraging Competition, a novel bioinspired visual robustness benchmark to test generalization in reinforcement learning (RL) agents trained to navigate a virtual environment toward a visually cued target. Participants train agents to perform a visually guided foraging task in a naturalistic 3D Unity environment and are evaluated on their ability to generalize to unseen, ecologically realistic visual perturbations. What sets this challenge apart is its biological grounding: real mice performed the same task, and participants receive both behavioral performance data and large-scale neural recordings (19,000+ neurons across visual cortex) for benchmarking. The competition features two tracks: (1) Visual Robustness, assessing generalization across held-out visual perturbations; and (2) Neural Alignment, evaluating how well agents' internal representations predict mouse visual cortical activity via a linear readout. We provide the full Unity environment, a fog-perturbed training condition for validation, baseline proximal policy optimization (PPO) agents, and a rich multimodal dataset. By bridging reinforcement learning, computer vision, and neuroscience through a shared, behaviorally grounded task, this challenge advances the development of robust, generalizable, and biologically inspired AI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41001578PMC12458599What 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.