Linguistic properties and model scale in brain encoding: from small to compressed language models

Recent work has shown that scaling large language models (LLMs) improves their alignment with human brain activity, yet it remains unclear what drives these gains and which representational properties are responsible. Although larger models often yield better task performance and brain alignment, they are increasingly difficult to analyze mechanistically. This raises a fundamental question: what is the minimal model capacity required to capture brain-relevant representations? To address this question, we systematically investigate how constraining model scale and numerical precision affects brain alignment. We compare full-precision LLMs, small language models (SLMs), and compressed variants (quantized and pruned) by predicting fMRI responses during naturalistic language comprehension. Across model families up to 14B parameters, we find that 3B SLMs achieve brain predictivity indistinguishable from larger LLMs, whereas 1B models degrade substantially, particularly in semantic language regions. Brain alignment is remarkably robust to compression: most quantization and pruning methods preserve neural predictivity, with GPTQ as a consistent exception. Linguistic probing reveals a dissociation between task performance and brain predictivity: compression degrades discourse, syntax, and morphology, yet brain predictivity remains largely unchanged. Overall, brain alignment saturates at modest model scales and is resilient to compression, challenging common assumptions about neural scaling and motivating compact models for brain-aligned language modeling.

Instruction-Tuned Video-Audio Models Elucidate Functional Specialization in the Brain

Recent voxel-wise multimodal brain encoding studies have shown that multimodal large language models (MLLMs) exhibit a higher degree of brain alignment compared to unimodal models in both unimodal and multimodal stimulus settings. More recently, instruction-tuned multimodal models have shown to generate task-specific representations that align strongly with brain activity. However, prior work evaluating the brain alignment of MLLMs has primarily focused on unimodal settings or relied on non-instruction-tuned multimodal models for multimodal stimuli. To address this gap, we investigated brain alignment, that is, measuring the degree of predictivity of neural activity recorded while participants were watching naturalistic movies (video along with audio) with representations derived from MLLMs. We utilized instruction-specific embeddings from six video and two audio instruction-tuned MLLMs. Experiments with 13 video task-specific instructions show that instruction-tuned video MLLMs significantly outperform non-instruction-tuned multimodal (by 15%) and unimodal models (by 20%). Our evaluation of MLLMs for both video and audio tasks using language-guided instructions shows clear disentanglement in task-specific representations from MLLMs, leading to precise differentiation of multimodal functional processing in the brain. We also find that MLLM layers align hierarchically with the brain, with early sensory areas showing strong alignment with early layers, while higher-level visual and language regions align more with middle to late layers. These findings provide clear evidence for the role of task-specific instructions in improving the alignment between brain activity and MLLMs, and open new avenues for mapping joint information processing in both the systems. We make the code publicly available [https://github.com/subbareddy248/mllm_videos].

Correlating instruction-tuning (in multimodal models) with vision-language processing (in the brain)

Transformer-based language models, though not explicitly trained to mimic brain recordings, have demonstrated surprising alignment with brain activity. Progress in these models-through increased size, instruction-tuning, and multimodality-has led to better representational alignment with neural data. Recently, a new class of instruction-tuned multimodal LLMs (MLLMs) have emerged, showing remarkable zero-shot capabilities in open-ended multimodal vision tasks. However, it is unknown whether MLLMs, when prompted with natural instructions, lead to better brain alignment and effectively capture instruction-specific representations. To address this, we first investigate brain alignment, i.e., measuring the degree of predictivity of neural visual activity using text output response embeddings from MLLMs as participants engage in watching natural scenes. Experiments with 10 different instructions show that MLLMs exhibit significantly better brain alignment than vision-only models and perform comparably to non-instruction-tuned multimodal models like CLIP. We also find that while these MLLMs are effective at generating high-quality responses suitable to the task-specific instructions, not all instructions are relevant for brain alignment. Further, by varying instructions, we make the MLLMs encode instruction-specific visual concepts related to the input image. This analysis shows that MLLMs effectively capture count-related and recognition-related concepts, demonstrating strong alignment with brain activity. Notably, the majority of the explained variance of the brain encoding models is shared between MLLM embeddings of image captioning and other instructions. These results suggest that enhancing MLLMs' ability to capture task-specific information could lead to better differentiation between various types of instructions, and thereby improving their precision in predicting brain responses.

Pearls from Pebbles: Improved Confidence Functions for Auto-labeling

Auto-labeling is an important family of techniques that produce labeled training sets with minimum manual labeling. A prominent variant, threshold-based auto-labeling (TBAL), works by finding a threshold on a model's confidence scores above which it can accurately label unlabeled data points. However, many models are known to produce overconfident scores, leading to poor TBAL performance. While a natural idea is to apply off-the-shelf calibration methods to alleviate the overconfidence issue, such methods still fall short. Rather than experimenting with ad-hoc choices of confidence functions, we propose a framework for studying the \emph{optimal} TBAL confidence function. We develop a tractable version of the framework to obtain \texttt{Colander} (Confidence functions for Efficient and Reliable Auto-labeling), a new post-hoc method specifically designed to maximize performance in TBAL systems. We perform an extensive empirical evaluation of our method \texttt{Colander} and compare it against methods designed for calibration. \texttt{Colander} achieves up to 60\% improvements on coverage over the baselines while maintaining auto-labeling error below $5\%$ and using the same amount of labeled data as the baselines.

The Cost of Compression: Investigating the Impact of Compression on Parametric Knowledge in Language Models

Compressing large language models (LLMs), often consisting of billions of parameters, provides faster inference, smaller memory footprints, and enables local deployment. Two standard compression techniques are pruning and quantization, with the former eliminating redundant connections in model layers and the latter representing model parameters with fewer bits. The key tradeoff is between the degree of compression and the impact on the quality of the compressed model. Existing research on LLM compression primarily focuses on performance in terms of general metrics like perplexity or downstream task accuracy. More fine-grained metrics, such as those measuring parametric knowledge, remain significantly underexplored. To help bridge this gap, we present a comprehensive analysis across multiple model families (ENCODER, ENCODER-DECODER, and DECODER) using the LAMA and LM-HARNESS benchmarks in order to systematically quantify the effect of commonly employed compression techniques on model performance. A particular focus is on tradeoffs involving parametric knowledge, with the goal of providing practitioners with practical insights to help make informed decisions on compression. We release our codebase1 to enable further research.