Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes there was. However this is a different paper, describing a different method, applied to a different dataset, with different results. As the abstract says, "In particular, MindEye can retrieve the exact original image even among highly similar candidates indicating that its brain embeddings retain fine-grained image-specific information. This allows us to accurately retrieve images even from large-scale databases…
If it's still retrieving an image and not reconstructing it, if the dataset is large enough that's decently fine, but this is generally not how diffusion models work in general and I'd have expected the model to map the fMRI data to a wholly new image.
fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
41–50 of 69 posts
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#42For context, early vision is easier to map than you might expect. Here's a radiograph of the primary visual cortex created in 1982 by projecting a pattern onto a macaque's retina: https://web.archive.org/web/20100814085656im_/http://hubel.m... An injection of radioactive sugar lets you see where the neurons were firing away and metabolizing the sugar. ( https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7134981/ )
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#43Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's "VGhlIFRocmVlLUJvZHkgUHJvYmxlbQ==" The aliens cannot lie to each other (they don't even have the idea of a lie), because their thoughts are transparent to each other.
Sounds like a recipe for conflict.
Few, if any, people who currently have power, would be able to absorb the sheer amount of hitherto hidden distrust or resentment that their subordinates harbor towards them.
Interestingly, there might be two very different end stages.
Either a very open society where people at the top are selected to be non-narcissist and stoic, or a very closed and oppressive society where the absolute ruler is kept in power by a bunch of truly zombified and obedient warriors whose loyalty is real and unshakeable, and who will kill anyone whose brain entertains any rebel ideas too much.
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#45Wasn't there something similar a few months ago on HN and where the top comment talked about how it's not as impressive as it sounds [0]? The main issue is that this type of methodology is pulling from a pool of images, not literally reconstructing what image was seen in the brain directly. > I immediately found the results suspect, and think I have found what is actually going on. The dataset it was trained on was 2…
So we are doing both reconstruction and retrieval.
The reconstruction achieves SOTA results. The retrieval demonstrates that the image embeddings contain fine-grained information, not just saying it's just a picture of a teddy bear and then the diffusion model just generates a random teddy bear picture.
I think the zebra example really highlights that. The image embedding generated matches the exact zebra image that was seen by the person. If the model only could say it's just a zebra picture, it wouldn't be able to do that. But the model is picking up on fine-grained info present in the fMRI signal.
The blog post has more information and the paper itself has even more information so please check it out! :)
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#46Wasn't there something similar a few months ago on HN and where the top comment talked about how it's not as impressive as it sounds [0]? The main issue is that this type of methodology is pulling from a pool of images, not literally reconstructing what image was seen in the brain directly. > I immediately found the results suspect, and think I have found what is actually going on. The dataset it was trained on was 2…
Reconstruction is the primary and difficult aim, but is what you want and expect when people talk such „mind reading”. Classifying something on brain activity has long been solved and is not difficult, it is almost trivial with modern data sizes and quality. At 80 categories and with data from higher visual areas you could even use an SVM for the basic classifier and then some method for getting a similar blob shape from the activity (V1-V3 are map-like), and get good results.
If you are ignorant about the question whether you are just doing classification you can easily get too-good-to-be-true results. With these newer methods relying on pretrained features this classification case can hide deep inside the model too, and can easily be missed.
The community is currently discussing to what extent this applies to these newer papers (start with original post): https://twitter.com/ykamit/status/1677872648590864385?s=20
One thing they showed is that the 80 categories of that data collapse to just 40 clusters in the semantic space.
(Kamitani has been working on the reconstruction question for long time and knows all these traps quite well.)
The deeprecon dataset proposed as an alternative has been around for a few years and been used in multiple reconstruction papers. It has many more classes, out of distribution „abstract“ images and no class overlap between train and test images, so it’s quite suitable for proving that it is actually reconstruction. But it’s also one order of magnitude smaller than the NSD data used for the newer reconstruction studies. If you modify the 80-class NSD data to not have train-test class overlap, the two diffusion methods tested there do not work as well, but still look like they do some reconstruction.
On deeprecon the two tested diffusion methods fail at reconstructing the abstract OOD images (which NSD does not have), something previous reconstruction methods could do.
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#47This is SO COOL. I'd guess (I did analysis for an fMRI lab for a year so I'm not a pro but not totally talking out of my orifice) that detecting images like this is among the easier things you could do (it probably wouldn't be so easy to do things like "guess the words I'm thinking of") and I suspect other sensory stuff might be harder but I have little knowledge there. One of the biggest issues with any attempt to e…
The fMRI dataset includes signal from the whole brain but we only use the data from the visual cortex for this study.
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#48Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's still retrieving an image and not reconstructing it, if the dataset is large enough that's decently fine, but this is generally not how diffusion models work in general and I'd have expected the model to map the fMRI data to a wholly new image.
Please read the paper. Or at least the blog post. It's really quite readable. They explain that they've done both retrieval and reconstruction, and have lots of pictures showing examples of each. https://medarc-ai.github.io/mindeye/
Re: fMRI-to-image with contrastive learning and diffusion priors
#50- Each participant in the dataset spent up to 40 hours in the MRI machine to gather sufficient training data.
- Models were trained separately for every participant and are not generalizable across people. Image limitations: MindEye is limited to the kinds of natural scenes used for training the model. For other image distributions, additional data collection and specialized generative models would be needed.
- … Non-invasive neuroimaging methods like fMRI not only require participant compliance but also full concentration on following instructions during the lengthy scan process. …