ArticleArXiv2026
Quantifying task-relevant representational similarity using decision variable correlation.
Article in ArXiv, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous studies have compared neural activities in the visual cortex to representations in deep neural networks trained on image classification. Interestingly, while some suggest that their representations are highly similar, others argued the opposite. Here, we propose a new approach to characterize the similarity of the decision strategies of two observers (models or brains) using decision variable correlation (DVC). DVC quantifies the image-by-image correlation between the decoded decisions based on the internal neural representations in a classification task. Thus, it can capture task-relevant information rather than general representational alignment. We evaluate DVC using monkey V4/IT recordings and network models trained on image classification tasks. We find that model-model similarity is comparable to monkey-monkey similarity, whereas model-monkey similarity is consistently lower. Strikingly, DVC decreases with increasing network performance on ImageNet-1k. Adversarial training does not improve model-monkey similarity in task-relevant dimensions assessed using DVC, although it markedly increases the model-model similarity. Similarly, pre-training on larger datasets does not improve model-monkey similarity. These results suggest a divergence between the task-relevant representations in monkey V4/IT and those learned by models trained on image classification tasks.
Identifiers
41542165PMC12803327What 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.