Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Xu, Binxia, Luo, Xiaoliang, Dickens, Luke, Mok, Robert M.
Format: Preprint
Published: 2026
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.07462
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866914464462274560
author Xu, Binxia
Luo, Xiaoliang
Dickens, Luke
Mok, Robert M.
author_facet Xu, Binxia
Luo, Xiaoliang
Dickens, Luke
Mok, Robert M.
contents Determining whether AI systems process information similarly to humans is central to cognitive science and trustworthy AI. While modern AI models can match human accuracy on standard tasks, such parity does not guarantee that their underlying decision-making strategies resemble those of humans. Assessing performance using error alignment metrics to compare how humans and models fail, and how this changes for distorted, or otherwise more challenging, stimuli, provides a viable pathway toward a finer characterization of model-human alignment. However, existing out-of-distribution (OOD) analyses for challenging stimuli are limited due to methodological choices: they define OOD shift relative to model training data or use arbitrary distortion-specific parameters with little correspondence to human perception, hindering principled comparisons. We propose a human-centred framework that redefines the degree of OOD as a spectrum of human perceptual difficulty. By quantifying how much a collection of stimuli deviates from an undistorted reference set based on human accuracy, we construct an OOD spectrum and identify four distinct regimes of perceptual challenge. This approach enables principled model-human comparisons at calibrated difficulty levels. We apply this framework to object recognition and reveal unique, regime-dependent model-human alignment rankings and profiles across deep learning architectures. Vision-language models are most consistently human aligned across near- and far-OOD conditions, but convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are more aligned than vision transformers (ViTs) for near-OOD and ViTs are more aligned than CNNs for far-OOD. Our work demonstrates the critical importance of accounting for cross-condition differences, such as perceptual difficulty, for a principled assessment of model-human alignment.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2603_07462
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Do Machines Fail Like Humans? A Human-Centred Out-of-Distribution Spectrum for Mapping Error Alignment
Xu, Binxia
Luo, Xiaoliang
Dickens, Luke
Mok, Robert M.
Artificial Intelligence
Determining whether AI systems process information similarly to humans is central to cognitive science and trustworthy AI. While modern AI models can match human accuracy on standard tasks, such parity does not guarantee that their underlying decision-making strategies resemble those of humans. Assessing performance using error alignment metrics to compare how humans and models fail, and how this changes for distorted, or otherwise more challenging, stimuli, provides a viable pathway toward a finer characterization of model-human alignment. However, existing out-of-distribution (OOD) analyses for challenging stimuli are limited due to methodological choices: they define OOD shift relative to model training data or use arbitrary distortion-specific parameters with little correspondence to human perception, hindering principled comparisons. We propose a human-centred framework that redefines the degree of OOD as a spectrum of human perceptual difficulty. By quantifying how much a collection of stimuli deviates from an undistorted reference set based on human accuracy, we construct an OOD spectrum and identify four distinct regimes of perceptual challenge. This approach enables principled model-human comparisons at calibrated difficulty levels. We apply this framework to object recognition and reveal unique, regime-dependent model-human alignment rankings and profiles across deep learning architectures. Vision-language models are most consistently human aligned across near- and far-OOD conditions, but convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are more aligned than vision transformers (ViTs) for near-OOD and ViTs are more aligned than CNNs for far-OOD. Our work demonstrates the critical importance of accounting for cross-condition differences, such as perceptual difficulty, for a principled assessment of model-human alignment.
title Do Machines Fail Like Humans? A Human-Centred Out-of-Distribution Spectrum for Mapping Error Alignment
topic Artificial Intelligence
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.07462