Side-scan sonar (SSS) mine classification is a challenging maritime vision problem characterized by extreme data scarcity and a large domain gap from natural images. While self-supervised learning (SSL) and general-purpose vision foundation models have shown strong performance in general vision and several specialized domains, their use in SSS remains largely unexplored. We present Mine-JEPA, the first in-domain SSL pipeline for SSS mine classification, using SIGReg, a regularization-based SSL loss, to pretrain on only 1,170 unlabeled sonar images. In the binary mine vs. non-mine setting, Mine-JEPA achieves an F1 score of 0.935, outperforming fine-tuned DINOv3 (0.922), a foundation model pretrained on 1.7B images. For 3-class mine-like object classification, Mine-JEPA reaches 0.820 with synthetic data augmentation, again outperforming fine-tuned DINOv3 (0.810). We further observe that applying in-domain SSL to foundation models degrades performance by 10--13 percentage points, suggesting that stronger pretrained models do not always benefit from additional domain adaptation. In addition, Mine-JEPA with a compact ViT-Tiny backbone achieves competitive performance while using 4x fewer parameters than DINOv3. These results suggest that carefully designed in-domain self-supervised learning is a viable alternative to much larger foundation models in data-scarce maritime sonar imagery.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Performance comparison across model scales. Using only 1,170 sonar images for pretraining, Mine-JEPA outperforms DINOv3, pretrained on 1.7B images, at both backbone scales. ViT-Tiny remains competitive with 4× fewer parameters.
Figure 2: Overview of the Mine-JEPA pipeline. Stage 1 extracts unlabeled 96×96 patches from full SSS images using a sliding window. Stage 2 performs in-domain self-supervised pretraining with SSS-adapted multi-view augmentation and the SIGReg objective. Stage 3 evaluates the pretrained backbone with frozen or fine-tuned probes for downstream patch classification.
Figure 3: Representative samples from the public side-scan sonar dataset. Top: a full SSS image with annotated mine-like contacts (MILCO) and non-mine bottom objects (NOMBO). Bottom: 96×96 patches from the three classes used in our evaluation: MILCO, background (BG), and NOMBO.
Method
Init
SSL Data
Best Probe
macro-F1
NOMBO F1
Acc
Random Init
Random
—
ft_mlp
0.557 ± 0.052
0.439 ± 0.091
58.3 ± 4.0%
IN1K Only
IN1K
—
ft_mlp
0.739 ± 0.028
0.647 ± 0.046
76.3 ± 2.6%
DINOv3
DINOv3
—
ft_mlp
0.810 ± 0.025
0.700 ± 0.068
83.4 ± 2.0%
SimCLR
IN1K
Real+Syn
finetune
0.801 ± 0.038
0.693 ± 0.084
82.6 ± 2.6%
VICReg
IN1K
Real+Syn
finetune
0.800 ± 0.037
0.676 ± 0.068
82.8 ± 3.0%
BYOL
IN1K
Real+Syn
finetune
0.693 ± 0.028
0.539 ± 0.059
72.8 ± 2.4%
Table 1: 3-class patch classification on BG/MILCO/NOMBO. For each method, we report the best probe mode and the corresponding macro-F1, NOMBO F1, and accuracy. Probe modes: linear and mlp (frozen backbone), finetune and ft mlp (fine-tuned backbone).
Hyperparameter
Value
Projection dim.
16
λ
0.1
Views ( V )
4
Batch size
1024
Optimizer
AdamW (weight decay 0.05)
Learning rate
1.4×10−3
Table 2: Default SSL pretraining configuration (ViT-S/16). All architectures use the same setup unless noted otherwise.
Method
Init
Params
3-class F1
2-class F1
MILCO Recall (%)
DINOv3
DINOv3
21.5M
0.810 ± 0.025
0.922 ± 0.018
88.1 ± 1.3
Mine-JEPA (ViT-S)
IN1K
21.6M
0.820 ± 0.018
0.935 ± 0.020
90.9 ± 2.4
Mine-JEPA (ViT-Tiny)
IN1K
5.5M
0.814 ± 0.026
0.935 ± 0.020
91.4 ± 2.3
Table 3: Model comparison across 3-class and binary settings. Mine-JEPA uses Real+Syn data for 3-class classification and Real data for binary classification. For each method, we report the best probe mode.
Config
Init
SSL Data
λ
macro-F1
Δ
Random Init
Random
—
—
0.557 ± 0.052
—
Natural Aug SSL
Random
Real ∗
0.02
0.312 ± 0.040
−24.5 %p
DINOv3 + SIGReg
DINOv3
Real
0.02
0.706 ± 0.068
−10.4 %p vs DINOv3
DINOv3 + SIGReg
DINOv3
Real+Syn
0.02
0.677 ± 0.031
−13.3 %p vs DINOv3
SIGReg (SSS aug)
Random
Real
0.02
0.725 ± 0.021
—
+ IN1K init
IN1K
Real
0.02
0.756 ± 0.054
+3.1%p vs Random SSL
Table 4: Ablation on initialization, augmentation, and data composition. Real ∗ denotes natural-image augmentation (saturation/hue jitter, solarization, grayscale). Rows 1–2 compare against Random Init, rows 3–4 against DINOv3, and rows 5–8 show cumulative gains; each Δ is relative to the preceding row.
SSL Method
Loss Type
proj. dim
Real only
Real+Syn
Δ
SIGReg (Ours)
Regularization
16
0.799 ± 0.036
0.820 ± 0.018
+2.1%p
VICReg
Regularization
2048
0.774 ± 0.025
0.800 ± 0.037
+2.6%p
SimCLR
Contrastive
128
0.806 ± 0.013
0.801 ± 0.038
−0.5 %p
BYOL
Distillation
256
0.774 ± 0.031
0.693 ± 0.028
−8.1 %p
Table 5: SSL method comparison and data scalability. All methods use ViT-S/16 with IN1K initialization, 100 epochs. macro-F1 on 3-class classification. Δ = Real+Syn − Real only.
Automated interpretation of side-scan sonar (SSS) imagery is traditionally hindered by view-dependence, as recorded intensities inextricably conflate intrinsic seabed reflectivity with transient acquisition geometries and acoustic artifacts. To address this, we introduce BenthicDINO, a physics-informed self-supervised learning framework that decouples acquisition dynamics from seabed representations. Utilizing a ConvNeXt-v2 backbone, physics-guided augmentations, and an HSIC penalty, BenthicDINO explicitly enforces feature invariance to physical viewing parameters like slant range and incidence angle. Evaluations demonstrate exceptional data efficiency - achieving near-peak performance in benthic habitat mapping with only 10% of available labels - and strong cross-domain generalization, outperforming fully supervised baselines on the AI4Shipwrecks benchmark using frozen representations.
Taqi Hamoda, Hayat Rajani, Nuno Gracias
Computer Vision and Robotics Research Institute (ViCOROB) of the University of Girona, Spain.
Vision foundation models trained on Internet-scale RGB datasets enable remarkable capabilities across a range of tasks, from text-to-video generation to few-shot 3D scene reconstruction. An acoustic foundation model trained on large-scale sonar datasets could enable similar capabilities in the underwater domain, where turbidity and low-visibility conditions make conventional RGB foundation models inapplicable. Unfortunately, a lack of freely available large-scale sonar datasets makes training such a model from scratch impractical. In this work, we demonstrate that vision foundation models can be efficiently adapted to the sonar setting by (1) exploiting the geometric relationship between the two sensing modalities and (2) employing accurate physics-based noise models for synthetic data generation. The resulting sonar adaptation models enable new capabilities: For the first time, we experimentally demonstrate sonar-based pose-free 3D reconstruction.
Kevin Zhang, Jingxi Chen, Mohamad Qadri +5
University of Maryland, College Park · Carnegie Mellon University · University of Rhode Island +1
Automatic target recognition (ATR) with synthetic aperture sonar (SAS) supports advanced naval capabilities, but deep learning is constrained by scarce target imagery, background clutter, and human-in-the-loop assessment. We adapt DINOv3 Vision Transformer (ViT) models to underwater SAS ATR using a three-stage parameter-efficient framework. Stage 1 uses Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) while freezing the ViT backbone, bridging the gap between natural-image pretraining and underwater acoustic propagation. Stage 2 uses hard-negative mining to strengthen the decision boundary against acoustic mimics, including rocks and sediment formations resembling man-made targets. Stage 3 uses Supervised Contrastive Learning (SupCon) to separate target and clutter representations. We evaluate at-sea SAS data using a mission-level geographic split, compare all arms at 85 percent test recall, and repeat each comparison over three random seeds. LoRA accounts for the primary effect, increasing area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) from 0.300 to 0.679 +/- 0.027 using the same frozen backbone. Rank 4 achieves this result while training only 0.26 percent of weights. Neither refinement stage exceeds its matched control: hard-negative mining changes AUPRC by -0.0045 +/- 0.0119 versus an equal-size random curriculum, and SupCon changes AUPRC by +0.0002 +/- 0.0096 versus the preceding stage. These null results indicate that mining occurred on data the encoder had already fit and that supervised stages had already imposed most target-clutter geometry. One efficient adaptation stage is sufficient; stacked refinement is not.
Dan Zimmerman, Frank E. Bobe, Amelia L. McCormack +2
Center for Connected Autonomy & AI Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, USA · Naval Surface Warfare Center Panama City Division Panama City, USA · Department of Computer Science Florida State University Tallahassee, USA