Three knowledgeable referees support acceptance for the contributions, notably for a proposed approach to extend CNNs with generative feedback, while one reviewer supports (marginal) reject. This paper was extensively discussed post-rebuttal — especially in light of the fact that the initial evaluation on brainscore appeared to have been flawed and that the results on brainscore have not just changed quantitatively but also qualitatively. I also agree with R4 that the overall evaluation is not particularly compelling as a general model of object recognition (see R4 points) as opposed to maybe a narrower approach to build robustness to adversarial attacks. Overall, there appears to be sufficient support because of the novelty of the idea to accept this paper but all reviewers agreed that the quantitative evaluation on brainscore needs to be fixed and claims revised accordingly.