Deep LLM layers expose passage-level context in EEG during silent reading

arXiv:2610.23638 · cs.LG, q-bio.NC · Submitted 2026-10-16 · Read on arXiv

cs.LG, q-bio.NC

Submitted: 2026-10-16

Updated: 2026-10-16

Comments: 41 pages (including 23 pages of Supplementary Material), 12 figures (including 5 in Supplementary Material)

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The gist: In a previous report we showed that a decoder can recover open-vocabulary word-level information from 19-channel EEG recorded during silent reading, by aligning short EEG windows with hidden-state

Abstract

In a previous report we showed that a decoder can recover open-vocabulary word-level information from 19-channel EEG recorded during silent reading, by aligning short EEG windows with hidden-state embeddings of the presented word taken from a large language model (LLM). That analysis contrasted two of the model's 33 layers: the context-free input embedding and one mid-depth layer. Here we ask how EEG-decodable structure is distributed over the full depth of the language model. We trained one decoder per layer of Llama-3.1-8B, with and without a causal transformer over the sequence of EEG windows. We distinguish word-level decodability from a context-tracking component. Word-level decodability peaks in early layers and declines steadily towards the last layer. In contrast, the context-tracking component of the retrieval gain rises with depth, both with and without a causal transformer. Unexpectedly, a decoder that sees a single 0.5-s window at a time tracks the text passage too. Two new controls dissect this component. A target-geometry control, a synthetic predictor made of the true target plus noise calibrated to each decoder's word-level accuracy, shows that context tracking is not a by-product of word decoding and target geometry. A control that permutes predictions across runs from either the same or from different sessions shows that most of the observed context-tracking is not caused by an EEG recording session signature. Instead, context tracking mostly follows the text. A single EEG window therefore carries passage-level information that a contextual target can absorb. The results locate word identity in the early layers of the language model, discourse state in the deeper layers, and make the choice of target layer a design dial for EEG language decoders.

Related papers