A central question in computational neuroscience is whether the learning rule used to train a neural network determines how well its internal representations align with those of the human visual cortex. We present a systematic comparison of four learning rules (backpropagation (BP), feedback alignment (FA), predictive coding (PC), and spike-timing-dependent plasticity (STDP)) applied to identical convolutional architectures and evaluated against human fMRI data from the THINGS-fMRI dataset (720 stimuli, 3 subjects) using Representational Similarity Analysis (RSA). All models process stimuli at 224 x 224 resolution; results are averaged across 5 random seeds. Crucially, we include an untrained random-weights baseline that reveals the dominant role of architecture. At V1/V2, the untrained baseline exceeds backpropagation (rho = 0.076 vs. rho = 0.034; Delta-rho = +0.044, p < 0.001), and STDP achieves the highest V1 alignment among trained rules (rho = 0.064). At LOC, only BP reliably exceeds the random baseline (rho = 0.012 vs. -0.005, p < 0.001). At IT, all five conditions converge (rho = 0.008-0.014) with no significant pairwise differences among trained rules (p > 0.05, FDR-corrected). FA consistently produces the lowest alignment at V1, V2, and LOC (rho = 0.012 at V1, below all other conditions). Partial RSA confirms all effects survive pixel-similarity control. Seed variability is small relative to between-rule differences at V1/V2. These results demonstrate that early visual alignment is architecture-driven, learning rules differentiate only at intermediate areas, and all rules converge at the highest levels of the hierarchy.

翻译：暂无翻译