# EEG-FM-Audit: A Systematic Evaluation and Analysis Pipeline for EEG Foundation Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.26910 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.26910/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 16 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 26 May 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 16 of 16)

- [EEGNet: A Compact Convolutional Network for EEG-based Brain-Computer Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.08024/) (2016)
- [Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.06196/) (2024)
- [Large Brain Model for Learning Generic Representations with Tremendous EEG Data in BCI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.18765/) (2024)
- [A System for Massively Parallel Hyperparameter Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.05934/) (2018)
- [CroCo: Self-Supervised Pre-training for 3D Vision Tasks by Cross-View Completion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10716/) (2022)
- [NeuroLM: A Universal Multi-task Foundation Model for Bridging the Gap between Language and EEG Signals](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.00101/) (2024)
- [REVE: A Foundation Model for EEG -- Adapting to Any Setup with Large-Scale Pretraining on 25,000 Subjects](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.21585/) (2025)
- [Neuro-GPT: Towards A Foundation Model for EEG](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.03764/) (2023)
- [EEG-TCNet: An Accurate Temporal Convolutional Network for Embedded Motor-Imagery Brain-Machine Interfaces](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2006.00622/) (2020)
- [Learning Representations from EEG with Deep Recurrent-Convolutional Neural Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1511.06448/) (2015)
- [EEG Foundation Models: A Critical Review of Current Progress and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.11783/) (2025)
- [EEG-FM-Bench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for the Systematic Evaluation and Diagnostic Analyses of EEG Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.17742/) (2025)
- [Are Large Brainwave Foundation Models Capable Yet? Insights from Fine-tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.01196/) (2025)
- [EEG-FM-Compass: Progress, Benchmarking, and Future Directions for EEG Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.17883/) (2026)
- [CSP-Net: Common Spatial Pattern Empowered Neural Networks for EEG-Based Motor Imagery Classification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.11879/) (2024)
- [Foundation Models for Cross-Domain EEG Analysis Application: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.15716/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [A Negative-Control Protocol for Clinical EEG Foundation-Model Benchmarks: Dataset Identity and External-Cohort Stress Testing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.24519/) (2026)
- [BrainBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Comprehensive EEG Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.04156/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large EEG Foundation Models (FMs) have shown great potential for decoding EEG signals across diverse cognitive tasks. However, existing EEG-FM studies exhibit three critical limitations: opaque supervised baseline tuning, unverified contributions of complex learning paradigms, and a lack of transparency in model decision-making. To address these, we propose EEG-FM-Audit, a comprehensive evaluation and analysis pipeline designed to systematize the assessment of EEG-FMs. EEG-FM-Audit consists of three primary components: (1) an ASHA-driven benchmarking protocol that ensures fair comparisons by transparently optimizing supervised baselines; (2) paradigm-level ablation studies to evaluate the effectiveness of learning paradigms in FMs; and (3) a neurophysiological probing (NPP) framework, which explores whether FMs leverage valid temporal, spatial, and spectral EEG properties. We apply EEG-FM-Audit to four state-of-the-art EEG-FMs and five representative supervised models across three public datasets. Our results reveal that properly tuned supervised baselines can match or outperform advanced FMs, despite requiring significantly fewer parameters. Furthermore, we find that the effectiveness of learning paradigms of FMs is highly dependent on dataset scale and architecture. Finally, NPP analysis demonstrates how FMs rely on specific physiological features, establishing a framework for more interpretable neural decoding.