Knowledge-aware Visual Question Generation for Remote Sensing Images

With the rapid development of remote sensing image archives, asking questions about images has become an effective way of gathering specific information or performing semantic image retrieval. However, current automatically generated questions tend to be simplistic and template-based, which hinders the deployment of question answering or visual dialogue systems for real-world applications. To enrich and diversify the questions with both image content and commonsense knowledge, we propose a Knowledge-aware Remote Sensing Visual Question Generation model (KRSVQG). The proposed model incorporates related knowledge triplets from external knowledge sources to broaden the question content, while employing image captioning as an intermediary representation to ground questions to the corresponding images. Moreover, KRSVQG utilizes a vision-language pre-training and fine-tuning strategy, enabling the model's adaptation to low data regimes. To evaluate the proposed KRSVQG model, we construct two knowledge-aware remote sensing visual question generation datasets: the NWPU-300 dataset and the TextRS-300 dataset. Evaluations, including metrics and human assessment, demonstrate that KRSVQG outperforms existing methods and leads to rich questions, grounded in both image and domain knowledge. As a key practice in vision-language research, knowledge-aware visual question generation advances the understanding of image content beyond pixels, facilitating the development of knowledge-enriched vision-language systems with vision-grounded human commonsense.

Remote sensing visual question answering (RS-VQA) requires answers that truly depend on image evidence, yet current remote sensing multimodal large language models (RS MLLMs) are still evaluated mainly by accuracy, which cannot reveal whether a correct answer was produced without using the image. This setting introduces three challenges: demonstrations retrieved across different ground sample distances (GSD), sensors, and city textures may be poorly matched; real queries often involve long visual contexts from multi-scale tiles, multi-temporal frames, and retrieved knowledge, where evidence can be diluted and errors can propagate through multi-step reasoning; and prior-only answering remains invisible to standard metrics. We present AVA, a training-free framework that wraps a frozen RS MLLM with three modules. GDR performs GSD-bucketed, scene-graph-based demonstration retrieval and filters demonstrations whose answers are unsupported by their images. MACE decomposes each query into an evidence-typed sub-question DAG, routes sub-questions to suitable perception tools, and records verified provenance in a shared evidence ledger with bounded re-perception. CVA audits the final answer through counterfactual perturbations of cited evidence, including ablation and swap, and computes a visual-dependency score for confidence calibration and evidence-forcing re-query. On RSVQA-LR/HR, VRSBench, and LHRS-Bench, AVA improves average accuracy by up to 2.40 points over the strongest same-setting baselines, raises the visual-dependency score from 0.28 to 0.49, reduces the prior-only answer rate from 46.2 percent to 21.7 percent, and lowers the hallucination rate from 17.1 percent to 9.8 percent, with 2.6x the cost of a single backbone forward pass and no fine-tuning.

In grounded remote sensing visual question answering, a model produces a textual answer and identifies relevant objects in the image as grounding evidence. Existing evaluations measure answer correctness and localization quality, but do not directly assess answer-grounding consistency. We propose the Answer-Evidence Support Protocol (AESP) to assess this consistency through evidence support: whether the grounding evidence supports the model's own answer. AESP applies task-specific rules to existence, counting, and comparison questions. We further construct the Grounded Remote Sensing Visual Question Answering (G-RSVQA) benchmark, containing 15,027 samples with questions, reference answers, and all related object-level annotations. Experiments on seven grounded vision--language models reveal failures of evidence support across all three question types. Up to 50.82% of correct answers in the evidence evaluation subset are not supported by the provided grounding evidence.