ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
When does more data help? Spectral Geometry and Scaling Laws in MRI Transformers.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Scaling laws describe how model performance improves as the amount of training data increases, and recent theories such as the zeta law suggest that scaling behavior is influenced by the eigenspectrum of the model's latent representation. Here, we evaluated whether the distribution of discriminative signals across spectral modes predicts the future scaling behavior, for MRI transformers trained for disease classification. We trained three supervised 3D vision transformers (ViT3D, MINiT, and NIT) for Alzheimer's disease classification using 2,822 training scans from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI); we compared their encoder spectra with that of a frozen self-supervised DINO ViT-B/16 encoder adapted to 3D MRI. The supervised models learned highly concentrated representations, with 90-96% of CLS-token variance captured by a single principal component, whereas DINO distributed signal across many latent directions. Via spectral expansion of the Mahalanobis signal, we found that supervised training concentrated disease information into a single dominant mode, while self-supervised training produced a richer spectral geometry with higher effective rank and discoverability. This led to different scaling behavior: supervised models exhibited flatter
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.