Electroencephalography (EEG) is a cornerstone of brain-computer interfaces and clinical neuroscience, yet deep learning models are typically trained and evaluated under a single, unreported preprocessing pipeline. We formalize preprocessing choices as a counterfactual intervention space and show that EEG predictions are surprisingly unstable under this space: across six datasets spanning four paradigms, up to 42% of trial-level predictions flip when only the preprocessing changes, a variability that standard uncertainty methods do not explicitly quantify because they condition on a fixed preprocessing pipeline. We provide three tools to make this instability measurable, decomposable, and reducible. First, a Walsh-Hadamard decomposition of the 2^7 pipeline space reveals that sensitivity is near-additive in practice under the binary intervention design, enabling efficient step-by-step optimization. Second, we introduce Preprocessing Uncertainty (PU), a per-trial diagnostic that captures a dimension of instability complementary to model-based confidence. Third, we study Normalized Adaptive PGI (NA-PGI), a graph-structured regularizer that exploits the compositional structure of preprocessing interventions as one mitigation strategy with clear scope conditions.
Intracranial electroencephalography (iEEG) is widely used to record electrical activity directly from electrodes inside the human brain, making it an attractive modality for neural decoding. However, progress in iEEG decoding, especially toward general-purpose foundation models, remains difficult to measure reliably: datasets are task- or institution-specific, limiting evidence of generalization across tasks and recording environments, and preprocessing choices can strongly influence performance, making model improvements difficult to distinguish from preprocessing gains. Thus, we introduce iMINDBench, an iEEG Multi-Institution Neural Decoding Benchmark that evaluates models on a shared suite of fifteen decoding tasks across three naturalistic movie-watching datasets. The benchmark additionally defines standardized preprocessing tracks and fixed evaluation splits to support consistent model comparisons. Using iMINDBench, we find that the evaluated pretrained systems generally outperform baselines within their respective preprocessing tracks, while strong spectral baselines remain competitive across institutional datasets. In our scaling study, adding up to 25 times more supervised data from other subjects or institutions yields only small or task-dependent gains over within-session training. Together, these findings highlight the need for iEEG models that improve on strong preprocessing baselines and make more effective use of data across subjects and institutions. Project website: https://imindbench.github.io/
The development of generalizable electroencephalography (EEG) decoding models is essential for robust brain-computer interfaces (BCI) and objective neural biomarkers in mental health. Conventional approaches have been hindered by poor cross-subject and cross-task generalization, owing to high inter-subject variability and non-stationary neural signals. We address this challenge with a zero-shot cross-subject decoding framework on the large-scale Healthy Brain Network dataset, benchmarking a convolutional neural network baseline, a hybrid LSTM, and a Transformer-based foundation model. To adapt the Transformer for regression while averting catastrophic forgetting, we propose a novel progressive unfreezing strategy. The baseline yielded an nRMSE of 0.9991, whereas our fine-tuned Transformer achieved 0.9799 on unseen subjects. This work advances scalable, calibration-free EEG decoding for computational psychiatry and behavioral prediction.
Baimam Boukar Jean Jacques, Brandone Fonya, Nchofon Tagha Ghogomu +2
Pretrained EEG foundation models are proposed for clinical decoding, but whether reported gains transfer across populations or survive negative controls is unclear. We benchmark LaBraM, EEGMamba, CBraMod, REVE, LEAD, BENDR, and BIOT on five clinical tasks across four datasets. Primary analyses use frozen linear probes with subject-disjoint LOSO or grouped five-fold validation. Because CAUEEG releases no patient identifiers, it is evaluated at recording level with a patient-disjoint sensitivity. We challenge apparent gains using stronger classical comparators, label permutation, scrambled-label fine-tuning, and random-initialisation controls. In a matched 19-channel CAUEEG evaluation (Normal/MCI/Dementia; N = 1,187 recordings), classical features achieve 0.734 macro-AUROC versus 0.699 for BIOT, 0.669 for CBraMod, and 0.568 for REVE. A patient-disjoint sensitivity retains the classical-over-REVE ordering (0.717 versus 0.565). Dataset identity is decoded from frozen REVE embeddings at or near ceiling across Western-Korean and Western-Western pairs, including after PCA-50 and removal of line-frequency and amplitude-scale information. This establishes dataset membership, not a causal site or population effect. A matched random-initialised encoder exceeds pretrained REVE on CAUEEG (0.659 versus 0.570). On CHB-MIT cross-subject ictal detection (n = 23), REVE reaches 0.793, versus 0.739 for the best enhanced nonlinear comparator, 0.701 for random initialisation, and 0.505 for raw-signal random features. Because preprocessing removes absolute amplitude, this does not establish superiority over every plausible handcrafted baseline. Conclusions change materially after montage matching, patient-overlap checks, stronger comparators, and representation controls. We distill these checks into a reporting protocol for clinical EEG foundation-model studies.