It Depends on the Dataset: When a Brain-Encoding Model's Predicted Responses Beat Their Visual Backbone for Video Memorability

Brain-encoding foundation models predict fMRI responses to video, audio, and text well enough to win the Algonauts 2025 challenge. We ask whether their predicted responses, obtained with no scanner, are a useful feature lens for a downstream human-behavior task: forecasting the memorability of short videos. We project each clip into TRIBE v2's predicted cortical space and forecast short-term memorability with ridge regression, against a matched control: the model's own V-JEPA2 visual backbone taken before the brain projection. The answer is dataset-dependent, and cleanly so. Within Memento10k the backbone wins (Spearman 0.594 vs 0.544 for the brain projection); within VideoMem the brain projection wins (0.415 vs 0.368, delta +0.047, 95% CI [+0.009, +0.088]). Both within-dataset gaps have bootstrap intervals excluding zero, in opposite directions. Cross-dataset transfer inherits the split: trained on Memento10k and tested on VideoMem the brain projection beats the backbone (+0.076), while the reverse loses heavily (-0.311). Each representation transfers best onto the dataset it already fits better. The VideoMem advantage is not a sample-size artifact (it survives matched training size and a PCA-then-ridge pipeline) and not mere compression of the backbone (a compressed or heavily regularized backbone tops out below the brain projection, which also beats a transfer-tuned backbone, +0.053). So predicted-brain features carry a small but real memorability signal the backbone misses on one dataset and not the other: not a domain-general prior, but a dataset-specific representation. A vision-orthogonal component (partial Spearman 0.19, permutation p=2.5e-4) localizes to ventral occipito-temporal cortex. Code and predicted-response arrays are released; source videos and scores are not redistributed.