The Hard Limits of Decoding Mental States: The Decodability of fMRI
Jabakhanji, R.; Vigotsky, A. D.; Bielefeld, J.; Huang, L.; Baliki, M. N.; Iannetti, G.; Apkarian, A. V.
Show abstract
High-profile studies claim to assess mental states across individuals using multi-voxel decoders of brain activity. The fixed, fine-grained, multi-voxel patterns in these "optimized" decoders are purportedly necessary for discriminating between, and accurately identifying, mental states. Here, we present compelling evidence that the efficacy of these decoders is overstated. Across a variety of tasks, decoder patterns were not necessary. Not only were "optimized decoders" spatially imprecise and 90% redundant, but they also performed similarly to simpler decoders, built from average brain activity. We distinguish decoder performance when used for discriminating between, in contrast to identifying, mental states, and show even when discrimination performance is strong, identification can be poor. Using similarity rules, we derived novel and intuitive discriminability metrics that capture 95% and 68% of discrimination performance within- and across-subjects, respectively. These findings demonstrate that current across-subject decoders remain inadequate for real-life decision making.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Expectation generation and its effect on subsequent pain and visual perception 95%
- The lexical categorization model: A computational model of left-ventral occipito-temporal cortex activation in visual word recognition 94%
- Meta-Reinforcement Learning reconciles surprise, value and control in the anterior cingulate cortex. 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.