Fine-Grained Object Detection with Remote-Sensing Data Using Optimized YOLO-based Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Remote sensing data is used in various fields, such as environmental monitoring, urban planning, agriculture, and disaster management. Advances in satellite technology permit the creation of high-quality data, including high-resolution remote-sensing images. However, classical techniques struggle to process and extract information from large quantities and high-resolution remote-sensing data. In this context, with the advancement in computing power, deep learning has become a powerful tool for extracting features and processing remote-sensing data. Despite these advancements, remote-sensing object detection faces challenges related to the diversity of object types, variations in scale and resolution, and the presence of occlusion, which can hinder the accuracy and robustness of detection models. This paper explores YOLO-based architectures for horizontal and oriented bounding box detection in fine-grained object detection using the FAIR1M dataset. FAIR1M provides high-resolution satellite images with 5 object categories and 37 object sub-categories. The best model in horizontal object detection is the YOLOv9e, achieving a mAP50 of 44.6 %. The best model in oriented object detection is a pre-trained model using a custom weighted data loader, achieving a mAP50 of 40.5 %. We further analyze the strengths and limitations of these techniques for fine-grained remote-sensing object detection and highlight the contributions to improving the models' performances depending on the application. We then conclude and give directions for future work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it