# Samples, Sources, Space: Decomposing Data Scale in Spatially Structured Representation Learning of Human Brain Microarchitecture

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.31201 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.31201/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 20 of its 36 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.11929/) (2020)
- [PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.01703/) (2019)
- [DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.07193/) (2023)
- [Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2001.08361/) (2020)
- [Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.15556/) (2022)
- [Vision Transformers Need Registers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.16588/) (2023)
- [Deduplicating Training Data Makes Language Models Better](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.06499/) (2021)
- [Beyond neural scaling laws: beating power law scaling via data pruning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14486/) (2022)
- [Scaling Laws for Autoregressive Generative Modeling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.14701/) (2020)
- [Scaling Data-Constrained Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.16264/) (2023)
- [Virchow2: Scaling Self-Supervised Mixed Magnification Models in Pathology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.00738/) (2024)
- [D4: Improving LLM Pretraining via Document De-Duplication and Diversification](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.12284/) (2023)
- [Tile2Vec: Unsupervised representation learning for spatially distributed data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.02855/) (2018)
- [Full-Resolution Residual Networks for Semantic Segmentation in Street Scenes](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1611.08323/) (2016)
- [A Clinical Benchmark of Public Self-Supervised Pathology Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.06508/) (2024)
- [ViT-5: Vision Transformers for The Mid-2020s](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.08071/) (2026)
- [Deploying Geospatial Foundation Models in the Real World: Lessons from WorldCereal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.00858/) (2025)
- [Self-Supervised Representation Learning for Nerve Fiber Distribution Patterns in 3D-PLI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.17207/) (2024)
- [Mapping on a Budget: Optimizing Spatial Data Collection for ML](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.03749/) (2025)
- [CytoNet: A Foundation Model for the Human Cerebral Cortex at Cellular Resolution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.01870/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Scaling studies typically represent training data by a single count of samples. For hierarchically and spatially structured data, however, the same number of samples can be drawn from few or many sources and distributed differently across the underlying domain. We therefore study data scaling as an allocation problem, separating unique sample count, source diversity, and spatial coverage. We study this decomposition in microscopic whole-brain histology, where a source is an individual brain, and a sample is an image patch at a specific spatial location. Across 93 controlled pretraining runs of a contrastive model that uses spatial proximity for supervision, we vary data allocation, compute, and model capacity over 11.6 million spatially anchored image patches from 21 human brains. Performance improves with more unique samples, broader spatial coverage, additional compute, and larger model capacity. At fixed sample count, distributing samples across one to 18 subjects produces no detectable improvement, even though representations generalize substantially better to subjects encountered during pretraining. Inter-subject variation therefore strongly affects generalization, but additional subjects provide no benefit when a fixed sample budget is distributed across more sources. These results establish sample count, source diversity, and spatial coverage as distinct axes of data scaling in spatially structured representation learning.