arXiv subjects

Yiqing Bo

Publications and source records attributed to Yiqing Bo.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

Integrated representational signatures strengthen specificity in brains and models

The extent to which different neural or artificial neural networks (models) rely on equivalent representations to support similar tasks remains a central question in neuroscience and machine learning. Prior work has typically compared systems using a single representational similarity metric, yet each captures only one facet of representational structure. To address this, we leverage a suite of representational similarity metrics-each capturing a distinct facet of representational correspondence, such as geometry, unit-level tuning, or linear decodability-and assess brain region or model separability using multiple complementary measures. Metrics that preserve geometric or tuning structure (e.g., RSA, Soft Matching) yield stronger region-based discrimination, whereas more flexible mappings such as Linear Predictivity show weaker separation. These findings suggest that geometry and tuning encode brain-region- or model-family-specific signatures, while linearly decodable information tends to be more globally shared across regions or models. To integrate these complementary representational facets, we adapt Similarity Network Fusion (SNF), a framework originally developed for multi-omics data integration. SNF produces substantially sharper regional and model family-level separation than any single metric and yields robust composite similarity profiles. Moreover, clustering cortical regions using SNF-derived similarity scores reveals a clearer hierarchical organization that aligns closely with established anatomical and functional hierarchies of the visual cortex-surpassing the correspondence achieved by individual metrics.

q-bio.NC↗

arXiv2025

Comparing and Integrating Different Notions of Representational Correspondence in Neural Systems

The extent to which different biological and artificial neural systems rely on equivalent internal representations to support similar tasks remains a central question in neuroscience and machine learning. Prior work typically compares systems using a single representational similarity metric, even though different metrics emphasize distinct facets of representational correspondence. Here we evaluate a suite of representational similarity measures by asking how well each metric recovers known structure across two domains: for artificial models, whether procedurally dissimilar models (differing in architecture or training paradigm) are assigned lower similarity than procedurally matched models; and for neural data, whether responses from distinct cortical regions are separated while responses from the same region align across subjects. Across both vision models and neural recordings, metrics that preserve representational geometry or tuning structure more reliably separate this structure than more flexible mappings such as linear predictivity. To integrate these complementary facets, we adapt Similarity Network Fusion, originally developed for multi-omics integration, to combine similarity graphs across metrics. The resulting fused similarity yields sharper separation of procedurally defined model families and, when applied to neural data, recovers a clearer hierarchical organization of the ventral visual stream that aligns more closely with established anatomical and functional hierarchies than single metrics. Overall, this approach reveals which dimensions of representational correspondence recover meaningful structure in models and brains, and how complementary notions of similarity can be integrated.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2025

Measuring the Measures: Discriminative Capacity of Representational Similarity Metrics Across Model Families

Representational similarity metrics are fundamental tools in neuroscience and AI, yet we lack systematic comparisons of their discriminative power across model families. We introduce a quantitative framework to evaluate representational similarity measures based on their ability to separate model families-across architectures (CNNs, Vision Transformers, Swin Transformers, ConvNeXt) and training regimes (supervised vs. self-supervised). Using three complementary separability measures-dprime from signal detection theory, silhouette coefficients and ROC-AUC, we systematically assess the discriminative capacity of commonly used metrics including RSA, linear predictivity, Procrustes, and soft matching. We show that separability systematically increases as metrics impose more stringent alignment constraints. Among mapping-based approaches, soft-matching achieves the highest separability, followed by Procrustes alignment and linear predictivity. Non-fitting methods such as RSA also yield strong separability across families. These results provide the first systematic comparison of similarity metrics through a separability lens, clarifying their relative sensitivity and guiding metric choice for large-scale model and brain comparisons.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2024

Evaluating Representational Similarity Measures from the Lens of Functional Correspondence

Neuroscience and artificial intelligence (AI) both face the challenge of interpreting high-dimensional neural data, where the comparative analysis of such data is crucial for revealing shared mechanisms and differences between these complex systems. Despite the widespread use of representational comparisons and the abundance classes of comparison methods, a critical question remains: which metrics are most suitable for these comparisons? While some studies evaluate metrics based on their ability to differentiate models of different origins or constructions (e.g., various architectures), another approach is to assess how well they distinguish models that exhibit distinct behaviors. To investigate this, we examine the degree of alignment between various representational similarity measures and behavioral outcomes, employing group statistics and a comprehensive suite of behavioral metrics for comparison. In our evaluation of eight commonly used representational similarity metrics in the visual domain -- spanning alignment-based, Canonical Correlation Analysis (CCA)-based, inner product kernel-based, and nearest-neighbor methods -- we found that metrics like linear Centered Kernel Alignment (CKA) and Procrustes distance, which emphasize the overall geometric structure or shape of representations, excelled in differentiating trained from untrained models and aligning with behavioral measures, whereas metrics such as linear predictivity, commonly used in neuroscience, demonstrated only moderate alignment with behavior. These insights are crucial for selecting metrics that emphasize behaviorally meaningful comparisons in NeuroAI research.

q-bio.NC↗