mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

fMRI predictors based on language models of increasing complexity recover brain left lateralization

arXiv 2405.17992 ↗First posted 28 May 2024cs.CL cs.AI q-bio.NCcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Over the past decade, studies of naturalistic language processing where participants are scanned while listening to continuous text have flourished. Using word embeddings at first, then large language models, researchers have created encoding models to analyze the brain signals. Presenting these models with the same text as the participants allows to identify brain areas where there is a significant correlation between the functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) time series and the ones predicted by the models' artificial neurons. One intriguing finding from these studies is that they have revealed highly symmetric bilateral activation patterns, somewhat at odds with the well-known left lateralization of language processing. Here, we report analyses of an fMRI dataset where we manipulate the complexity of large language models, testing 28 pretrained models from 8 different families, ranging from 124M to 14.2B parameters. First, we observe that the performance of models in predicting brain responses follows a scaling law, where the fit with brain activity increases linearly with the logarithm of the number of parameters of the model (and its performance on natural language processing tasks). Second, although this effect is present in both hemispheres, it is stronger in the left than in the right hemisphere. Specifically, the left-right difference in brain correlation follows a scaling law with the number of parameters. This finding reconciles computational analyses of brain activity using large language models with the classic observation from aphasic patients showing left hemisphere dominance for language.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 85 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 May 2024.

Builds on

17 of 85 references.

References · 17

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
  4. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
  5. 2023Mamba: Linear-Time Sequence Modeling with Selective State Spacescited by 4,718
  6. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
  7. 2022OPT: Open Pre-trained Transformer Language Modelscited by 3,512
  8. 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,344
  9. 2016Pointer Sentinel Mixture Modelscited by 3,096
  10. 2023Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and Scalingcited by 1,786
  11. 2024Gemma: Open Models Based on Gemini Research and Technologycited by 916
  12. 2019Interpreting and improving natural-language processing (in machines) with natural language-processing (in the brain)cited by 128
5 more
  1. 2024Stable LM 2 1.6B Technical Reportcited by 90
  2. 2023Scaling laws for language encoding models in fMRIcited by 68
  3. 2021Disentangling Syntax and Semantics in the Brain with Deep Networkscited by 40
  4. 2022Neural Language Models are not Born Equal to Fit Brain Data, but Training Helpscited by 26
  5. 2023Information-Restricted Neural Language Models Reveal Different Brain Regions' Sensitivity to Semantics, Syntax and Contextcited by 13

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 7; 2026: 1.

8 papers.