Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Akshett Rai Jindal
dblp:374/8305
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Vision and language · 44% Trustworthy machine learning · 44% Language models and text generation · 13% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Medical and health informatics · 50% Bioinformatics and computational biology · 50% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › language model interpretability
brain alignment |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain) · ICLR 2025 |
Computer vision › Vision and language › vision-language model
multimodal large language model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain) · ICLR 2025 |
Bioinformatics and computational biology › computational neuroscience › neural response modeling
brain encoding model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain) · ICLR 2025 |
Medical and health informatics
neuroimaging |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain) · ICLR 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
instruction tuning |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain) · ICLR 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
representational similarity analysis · 1.7fMRI · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain)abstractTransformer-based language models, though not explicitly trained to mimic brain recordings, have demonstrated surprising alignment with brain activity. Progress in these models—through increased size, instruction-tuning, and multimodality—has led to better representational alignment with neural data. Recently, a new class of instruction-tuned multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) have emerged, showing remarkable zero-shot capabilities in open-ended multimodal vision tasks. However, it is unknown whether MLLMs, when prompted with natural instructions, lead to better brain alignment and effectively capture instruction-specific representations. To address this, we first investigate the brain alignment, i.e., measuring the degree of predictivity of neural visual activity using text output response embeddings from MLLMs as participants engage in watching natural scenes. Experiments with 10 different instructions (like image captioning, visual question answering, etc.) show that MLLMs exhibit significantly better brain alignment than vision-only models and perform comparably to non-instruction-tuned multimodal models like CLIP. We also find that while these MLLMs are effective at generating high-quality responses suitable to the task-specific instructions, not all instructions are relevant for brain alignment. Further, by varying instructions, we make the MLLMs encode instruction-specific visual concepts related to the input image. This analysis shows that MLLMs effectively capture count-related and recognition-related concepts, demonstrating strong alignment with brain activity. Notably, the majority of the explained variance of the brain encoding models is shared between MLLM embeddings of image captioning and other instructions. These results indicate that enhancing MLLMs' ability to capture more task-specific information could allow for better differentiation between various types of instructions, and hence improve their precision in predicting brain responses. Subba Reddy Oota, Akshett Rai Jindal, Ishani Mondal, Khushbu Pahwa, Satya Sai Srinath Namburi, Manish Shrivastava 0001, Maneesh Kumar Singh 0001, Raju S. Bapi, Manish Gupta 0001 |
ICLR | 2 |