Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40606656›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroinformatics2025

Bridging neuroscience and AI: a survey on large language models for neurological signal interpretation.

Sreejith Chandrasekharan, Jisu Elsa Jacob

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sreejith ChandrasekharanFreelance Researcher, Trivandrum, Kerala, India.
Jisu Elsa JacobDepartment of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Sree Chitra Thirunal College of Engineering, Trivandrum, Kerala, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electroencephalogram (EEG) signal analysis is important for the diagnosis of various neurological conditions. Traditional deep neural networks, such as convolutional networks, sequence-to-sequence networks, and hybrids of such neural networks were proven to be effective for a wide range of neurological disease classifications. However, these are limited by the requirement of a large dataset, extensive training, and hyperparameter tuning, which require expert-level machine learning knowledge. This survey paper aims to explore the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to transform existing systems of EEG-based disease diagnostics. LLMs have a vast background knowledge in neuroscience, disease diagnostics, and EEG signal processing techniques. Thus, these models are capable of achieving expert-level performance with minimal training data, nominal fine-tuning, and less computational overhead, leading to a shorter time to find effective solutions for diagnostics. Further, in comparison with traditional methods, LLM's capability to generate intermediate results and meaningful reasoning makes it more reliable and transparent. This paper delves into several use cases of LLM in EEG signal analysis and attempts to provide a comprehensive understanding of techniques in the domain that can be applied to different disease diagnostics. The study also strives to highlight challenges in the deployment of LLM models, ethical considerations, and bottlenecks in optimizing models due to requirements of specialized methods such as Low-Rank Adapation. In general, this survey aims to stimulate research in the area of EEG disease diagnostics by effectively using LLMs and associated techniques in machine learning pipelines.

Indexed as

BERTelectroencephalogramGPTlarge language modelLLM

Identifiers

PMID40606656
PMCPMC12213581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.