Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.35056

Scaling Laws for EEG Decoding: How Much Data Is Enough?

José Maurício Nunes de Oliveira·Bruna J. Lopes·Léo Burgund·Raphael Y. Camargo·Bruno Aristimunha
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Deep learning has become a cornerstone of EEG-based brain decoding, with a growing number of architectures proposed every day. However, how the performance of these different models scales with data volume is not clear. Although this relationship has been characterized in other fields under the name of scaling laws, it remains poorly understood in the EEG domain. The present study addresses this gap by investigating how scan time and subject diversity affect the performance of different architectures. We evaluated five models across four EEG datasets. Training data volume was controlled by varying both subject count and trial volume under cross-subject validation. We then fitted power-law relationships to characterize the resulting behavior. Our findings reveal that as total data volume increases, the distinction between trial and subject scaling becomes largely irrelevant. Furthermore, we show that power-law relationships are both model and dataset-specific, yet they provide a robust descriptive framework for EEG decoding performance. Extrapolation to larger subject pools yields RMSE values below 0.1 in most cases. Our work contributes to the literature by providing a descriptive framework for data scaling in EEG and by demonstrating data-efficient experimental design in EEG research.

Explore related subjects

q-bio.NC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

José Maurício Nunes de Oliveira, Bruna J. Lopes, Léo Burgund, Raphael Y. Camargo, Bruno Aristimunha. 2026-09-28. Scaling Laws for EEG Decoding: How Much Data Is Enough?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.35056

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

BrainWave: A Brain Signal Foundation Model for Clinical Applications

Neural electrical activity is fundamental to brain function, underlying a range of cognitive and behavioral processes, including movement, perception, decision-making, and consciousness. Abnormal patterns of neural signaling often indicate the presence of underlying brain diseases. The variability among individuals, the diverse array of clinical symptoms from various brain disorders, and the limited availability of diagnostic classifications, have posed significant barriers to formulating reliable model of neural signals for diverse application contexts. Here, we present BrainWave, the first foundation model for both invasive and non-invasive neural recordings, pretrained on more than 40,000 hours of electrical brain recordings (13.79 TB of data) from approximately 16,000 individuals. Our analysis show that BrainWave outperforms all other competing models and consistently achieves state-of-the-art performance in the diagnosis and identification of neurological disorders. We also demonstrate robust capabilities of BrainWave in enabling zero-shot transfer learning across varying recording conditions and brain diseases, as well as few-shot classification without fine-tuning, suggesting that BrainWave learns highly generalizable representations of neural signals. We hence believe that open-sourcing BrainWave will facilitate a wide range of clinical applications in medicine, paving the way for AI-driven approaches to investigate brain disorders and advance neuroscience research.

q-bio.NC↗
arXiv2026

Emergence of psychopathological computations in large language models

Can large language models (LLMs) instantiate computations of psychopathology? In this work, we establish a computational-theoretical framework to provide an account of psychopathology applicable to LLMs. Based on the framework, we conduct experiments supporting two key claims: first, that network-theoretic computational structures of psychopathology exist in LLMs; and second, that executing these computational structures results in psychopathological functions. We further observe that as LLM size increases, the computational structure of psychopathology becomes denser and the functions more effective. Taken together, the results suggest that network-theoretic computations of psychopathology may have emerged in LLMs. We discuss alternative explanations, including pattern matching, persona modeling, and semantic coherence, and argue that they are either complementary to our interpretation or less consistent with the data.

q-bio.NC↗
arXiv2026

Maximum entropy models of neuronal populations at and off criticality

Empirical evidence of scaling behaviors in neuronal avalanches suggests that neuronal populations in the brain operate near criticality. Departure from scaling in neuronal avalanches has been used as a measure of distance to criticality and linked to brain disorders. A distinct line of evidence for brain criticality has come from thermodynamic signatures in maximum entropy (ME) models. Both of these approaches have been widely applied to the analysis of neuronal data. However, the relationship between deviations from avalanche criticality and thermodynamics of ME models of neuronal populations remains poorly understood. To address this question, we study spontaneous activity of organotypic rat cortex slice cultures in physiological and drug-induced hypo- or hyper-excitable conditions, which are classified as critical, subcritical and supercritical based on avalanche dynamics. We find that static ME models inferred from critical cultures show signatures of criticality in thermodynamic quantities, e.g. specific heat. However, such signatures are also present and equally strong in models inferred from supercritical cultures -- despite their altered dynamics and poor functional performance. On the contrary, ME models inferred from subcritical cultures do not show thermodynamic hints of criticality. Importantly, we confirm these results using an interpretable neural network model that can be tuned to and away from avalanche criticality. Our findings indicate that static maximum entropy models, although not constraining dynamical features, correctly distinguish subcritical from critical/supercritical systems. However, they may not be able to discriminate between avalanche criticality and supercriticality, suggesting that dynamics is relevant to capture the supercritical behavior and distinguish it from criticality.

q-bio.NC↗