ArticleCurrent biology : CB2025
Semantic language decoding across participants and stimulus modalities.
Article in Current biology : CB, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semantic encoding of trauma memories in the hippocampus among individuals with PTSD.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Trial
- Speech Brain-Computer Interfaces: A New Pathway for Restoring Communication in Anarthria.Neuroscience bulletin · 2026Article
- Safeguarding Neural Data.Neurology · 2026Review
- Decoding concept representations in aphasia after stroke.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Rapid cortical mapping with cross-participant encoding models.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Visual Semantic Encoding and Identification of Naturalistic Movies via High-Density Diffuse Optical Tomography.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Brain decoders that reconstruct language from semantic representations have the potential to improve communication for people with impaired language production. However, training a semantic decoder for a participant currently requires many hours of brain responses to linguistic stimuli, and people with impaired language production often also have impaired language comprehension. In this study, we tested whether language can be decoded from a goal participant without using any linguistic training data from that participant. We trained semantic decoders on brain responses from separate reference participants and then used functional alignment to transfer the decoders to the goal participant. Cross-participant decoder predictions were semantically related to the stimulus words, even when functional alignment was performed using movies with no linguistic content. To assess how much semantic representations are shared between language and vision, we compared functional alignment accuracy using story and movie stimuli and found that performance was comparable in most cortical regions. Finally, we tested whether cross-participant decoders could be robust to lesions by excluding brain regions from the goal participant prior to functional alignment and found that cross-participant decoders do not depend on data from any single brain region. These results demonstrate that cross-participant decoding can reduce the amount of linguistic training data required from a goal participant and potentially enable language decoding from participants who struggle with both language production and language comprehension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.