Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2607.01400

A global predicted-fMRI drive signal from TRIBE does not predict YouTube replay heatmaps

Abstract

Deep multimodal brain-encoding models now predict fMRI responses to naturalistic video with high accuracy; whether their predicted neural signals also forecast behavioral engagement is unknown. We run TRIBE, the winning model of the 2025 Algonauts challenge (Llama-3.2 + V-JEPA 2 + Wav2Vec-BERT), on 48 YouTube videos and reduce its predicted cortical response to a per-second engagement curve, the global field power. Correlated against each video's "most replayed" heatmap, a proxy for re-watch, it shows no evidence of prediction: the pooled position-controlled partial correlation is +0.058 (95% CI [-0.04, 0.15]; t(47)=1.21, p=0.23), and not above simple loudness/motion baselines. The raw correlation is also near zero; the moderate values for music videos are an onset-replay artifact. The null holds across six cortical-network readouts, value/salience ROIs, and a permutation test; a supervised leave-one-video-out probe appears to reach r=0.47 but collapses to a temporal-shape artifact under a proper position control. Running the probe on TRIBE's input streams reveals at most a small, borderline visual-stream signal (matched vs. mismatched p=0.004-0.06) and none in audio, text, or the predicted cortex. The inter-subject-correlation readout, the closest prior positive result, is unavailable from the subject-averaged released model, so we fit our own per-subject encoders on the Algonauts fMRI (validated in-domain at r=0.15 and cross-domain, Friends-to-film, at r=0.10); the predicted ISC still does not track re-watch (r=-0.04, p=0.34). We bound rather than merely fail to reject the null: a Bayes factor gives moderate evidence for it (BF01=3.2), an equivalence test excludes effects above r=0.14, and the target's split-half reliability (0.82; ceiling r=0.9) rules out a noisy-label artifact. We release code, a video-ID manifest, and a heatmap-acquisition method robust to YouTube's SABR streaming.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Barada Sahu, Shivesh Pandey. 2026-07-04. A global predicted-fMRI drive signal from TRIBE does not predict YouTube replay heatmaps. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01400

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE