Recent advances in Vision Language Models (VLMs) and Vision Foundation Models (VFMs) have opened new opportunities for zero-shot text-guided segmentation of remote sensing imagery. However, most existing approaches still rely on additional trainable components, limiting their generalisation and practical applicability. In this work, we investigate to what extent text-based remote sensing segmentation can be achieved without additional training, by relying solely on existing foundation models. We propose a simple yet effective approach that integrates contrastive and generative VLMs with the Segment Anything Model (SAM), enabling a fully training-free or lightweight LoRA-tuned pipeline. Our contrastive approach employs CLIP as mask selector for SAM's grid-based proposals, achieving state-of-the-art open-vocabulary semantic segmentation (OVSS) in a completely zero-shot setting. In parallel, our generative approach enables reasoning and referring segmentation by generating click prompts for SAM using GPT-5 in a zero-shot setting and a LoRA-tuned Qwen-VL model, with the latter yielding the best results. Extensive experiments across 19 remote sensing benchmarks, including open-vocabulary, referring, and reasoning-based tasks, demonstrate the strong capabilities of our approach. Code will be released at https://github.com/josesosajs/trainfree-rs-segmentation.
Figures & tables
Figure 2: Inference schemes of our segmentation approaches with (a) contrastive and (b) generative VLMs.
Method
OEM
LoveDA
iSAID
Potsdam
Vaihingen
UAVid
UDD5
VDD
Avg.
Trained on remote sensing data
SegEarth-OV [ 33 ]
40.3
36.9
21.7
48.5
40.0
42.5
50.6
45.3
39.2
Oracle
64.4
50.0
36.2
74.3
61.2
59.7
56.5
62.9
58.2
Zero-shot methods
CLIP [ 50 ]
12.0
12.4
7.5
15.6
10.8
10.9
9.5
14.2
11.4
MaskCLIP [ 87 ]
25.1
27.8
14.5
33.9
29.9
28.6
32.4
32.9
27.2
Table 1: Results of our contrastive VLM-based approach for text-based remote sensing segmentation on OVSS task. We evaluate 8 remote sensing multi-class datasets. Avg. is for average across all datasets. Oracle represents the upper bound, achieved by a fully supervised model [ 74 ] .
Method
Building extraction
Road Extraction
Flood Detection
Avg.
WHU-A
WHU-S
Inria
xBD-pre
CHN6
DG
MA
SpaceNet
WBS-SI
Trained on remote sensing data
SegEarth-OV [ 33 ]
49.2
28.4
44.6
37.0
35.4
17.8
11.5
23.8
60.2
34.2
Zero-shot methods
CLIP [ 50 ]
17.7
3.5
19.6
16.0
7.7
3.9
4.9
7.1
18.6
11.0
MaskCLIP [ 87 ]
29.8
14.0
33.4
29.2
28.1
13.2
10.6
20.8
39.8
24.3
Table 2: Results of our contrastive VLM-based approach for text-based remote sensing segmentation on OVSS task. We evaluate 9 remote sensing single-class datasets across building extraction, road extraction, and flood detection. Avg. is for average across all datasets.
Figure 3: Qualitative results of the training-free contrastive VLM pipeline on multi-class (first and second rows) and single-class (third row) OVSS tasks using remote sensing datasets.
Figure 4: Qualitative results of the LoRA-tuned generative VLM pipeline on reasoning (first and second rows) and referring (third row) tasks using remote sensing datasets.
Method
LLM
Trained on RS data
RRSIS-D
EarthReason
LLM
Mask Decoder
Extra
Val
Test
Val
Test
Zero-shot methods
GPT-Image-1
GPT-5
✗
✗
✗
20.1
17.2
38.4
41.0
Ours
GPT-5
✗
✗
✗
25.8
24.9
46.0
47.4
Classical methods
RRSIS [ 80 ]
BERT-base
✓
✓
✓
60.2
59.4
–
–
Table 3: Results of our generative VLM-based approach for text-based remote sensing segmentation on reasoning and referring tasks. We evaluate on test and validation sets from RRSIS-D [ 40 ] (referring) and EarthReason [ 34 ] (reasoning) datasets.
SAM
# clicks
OEM
LoveDA
UAVid
CHN6
SAM-Tiny
29 × 29
33.9
37.7
43.8
35.2
SAM-Base
29 × 29
34.2
38.1
44.2
36.2
SAM-Large
10 × 10
29.7
36.2
40.8
31.0
SAM-Large
20 × 20
33.1
38.1
44.1
35.6
SAM-Large
29 × 29
34.2
38.2
44.3
36.4
Table 4: Ablation of SAM scale and grid density on contrastive VLM-based approach.
Method
# clicks
EarthReason
RRSIS-D
Val
Test
Val
Test
Qwen2.5-VL-7B
6
67.8
69.3
61.4
60.9
Qwen3-VL-4B
6
70.4
71.7
67.3
67.2
Qwen3-VL-2B
2
63.8
64.9
61.1
61.0
Qwen3-VL-2B
4
67.9
69.8
66.4
66.4
Qwen3-VL-2B
6
70.6
72.7
68.1
67.6
Table 5: Ablation of generative VLM scale and click configuration.
Appendix figures & tables11 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Visualisations from click generation procedure. Masks (red) are produced by SAM prompted by clicks (green). Reported IoU is compared to groung truth mask.
Method
Building extraction
Road Extraction
Flood Detection
Avg.
WHU-A
WHU-S
Inria
xBD-pre
CHN6
DG
MA
SpaceNet
WBS-SI
Trained on remote sensing data
SegEarth-OV [ 33 ]
49.9
–
48.9
43.1
32.8
20.1
17.2
29.1
57.9
37.4
Zero-shot methods
Ours
58.7
–
53.8
39.1
33.5
15.0
20.3
29.5
56.3
38.3
Appendix
Table 6: Additional results of our contrastive VLM-based approach for text-based remote sensing segmentation on the OVSS task using images of size 896×896 . Avg. denotes the average across all datasets. Best results are highlighted in bold .
Method
VLM
Decoder
Time↓
IoU↑
Contrastive VLM; LoveDA test set
SegEarth-OV [ 33 ]
0.15B
SimFeatUp ⋆
4.1
36.9
Ours
0.15B
SAM (10 × 10)
3.6
36.2
Ours
0.15B
SAM (29 × 29)
14.0
38.2
Generative VLM; EarthReason test set
SegEarth-R1 [ 34 ]
1.3B
Mask2Former ⋆
0.44
70.7
Appendix
Table 7: Inference time comparison. ⋆ indicates that the component is trained on remote sensing data.
Figure 6: Qualitative comparison with baseline SegEarth-OV on OVSS datasets.
Figure 7: Top row: input image and corresponding prompts for the different generative VLM settings. Bottom row: outputs produced by each model.
Figure 8: Qualitative comparison with baseline methods on EarthReason dataset.
Figure 9: Qualitative results for reasoning segmentation on EarthReason dataset.
Figure 10: Qualitative results for referring segmentation on RRSIS-D dataset.
Figure 11: Failure cases on the EarthReason and RRSIS-D datasets for reasoning and referring segmentation, respectively.
Dataset
Source / Sensor
Resolution
Classes (FG+BG)
Split Used
Multi-class Open-Vocabulary Semantic Segmentation
OpenEarthMap [ 73 ]
Satellite & aerial imagery (global)
0.25–0.5 m
8 + 1
Val
LoveDA [ 69 ]
Google Earth (urban/rural)
0.3 m
6 + 1
Val
iSAID [ 70 ]
Google Earth, JL-1, GF-2
-
15 + 1
Val
Potsdam [ 22 ]
Aerial (urban)
5 cm
5 + 1
Val
Vaihingen [ 22 ]
Aerial (urban)
9 cm
5 + 1
Val
Appendix
Table 8: Summary of datasets used in our paper. Rows highlighted in brown correspond to building extraction datasets, green to road extraction, and blue to flood detection datasets. FG and BG are for foreground and background classes respectively.
Dataset
Class names
OpenEarthMap [ 73 ]
Bareland, Rangeland, Developed Space, Road, Tree, Water, Agriculture Land, and Building
LoveDA [ 69 ]
Building, Road, Water, Barren, Forest, and Agriculture
Open-vocabulary segmentation labels arbitrary categories from a text query without per-class training, yet on remote sensing imagery it underperforms on categories it handles reliably elsewhere. We find that much of this gap traces to the text query rather than to the segmentation model. Because these models are not specialized for overhead imagery, the class name that serves as the query is often a weak address into the vision-language embedding space. We show that a better name repairs part of the gap, while the remaining failures call for an address that the tested natural-language rephrasings do not provide. We recover that address from a few examples through textual inversion on a frozen model, keeping inference text only. On a representative benchmark this raises the mean intersection over union on the affected categories from 3.9 to 39.4, and across eight remote sensing datasets it improves over few-shot methods that instead inject visual prompts at inference.
Training-free open-vocabulary remote sensing segmentation (OVRSS), empowered by vision-language models, has emerged as a promising paradigm for achieving category-agnostic semantic understanding in remote sensing imagery. Existing approaches mainly focus on enhancing feature representations or mitigating modality discrepancies to improve patch-level prediction accuracy. However, such independent prediction schemes are fundamentally misaligned with the intrinsic characteristics of remote sensing data. In real-world applications, remote sensing scenes are typically large-scale and exhibit strong spatial as well as semantic correlations, making isolated patch-wise predictions insufficient for accurate segmentation. To address this limitation, we propose ConInfer, a context-aware inference framework for OVRSS that performs joint prediction across multiple spatial units while explicitly modeling their inter-unit semantic dependencies. By incorporating global contextual cues, our method significantly enhances segmentation consistency, robustness, and generalization in complex remote sensing environments. Extensive experiments on multiple benchmark datasets demonstrate that our approach consistently surpasses state-of-the-art per-pixel VLM-based baselines such as SegEarth-OV, achieving average improvements of 2.80% and 6.13% on open-vocabulary semantic segmentation and object extraction tasks, respectively. The implementation code is available at: https://github.com/Dog-Yang/ConInfer
Wenyang Chen, Zhanxuan Hu, Yaping Zhang +2
Yunnan Normal University · Xi’an University of Posts & Telecommunications
In this paper, we propose ReSeg-CLIP, a new training-free Open-Vocabulary Semantic Segmentation method for remote sensing data. To compensate for the problems of vision language models, such as CLIP in semantic segmentation caused by inappropriate interactions within the self-attention layers, we introduce a hierarchical scheme utilizing masks generated by SAM to constrain the interactions at multiple scales. We also present a model composition approach that averages the parameters of multiple RS-specific CLIP variants, taking advantage of a new weighting scheme that evaluates representational quality using varying text prompts. Our method achieves state-of-the-art results across three RS benchmarks without additional training.