Organizations: Laboratoire MIA La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, 17000, France · ISEN Toulon , Toulon, , France · Laboratoire L3i La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, 17000, France · Department of Electrical Engineering IIT Jammu, Jagti, 181221, India
Infrared small target detection is often used in different civilian and military applications to detect static or moving targets in scenes like in ground, air and sea surveillance. Research in this field started more than three decades ago, and the last two decades have witnessed very significant publications in this field following the rise of low-rank and sparse decomposition (model-based methods) and deep learning models (data-based methods). Furthermore, several surveys can be found in the literature but none of them addresses an overall review in this field. In this context, the aim of this paper is to provide a complete survey of the traditional and recent approaches in infrared small target detection. First, we categorize the different approaches found in the literature in terms of the modeling models, i.e mathematical models, machine learning models and signal processing models. Then, we have discussed them in terms of the critical situations that they claim to handle. Furthermore, we present the available resources, datasets and libraries. Then, we conclude with several promising directions for future research. For the sake of reading, this survey is divided into two parts: 1) "Traditional and Recent Approaches for Infrared Small Target Detection: Overview, Challenges and Perspectives (Part 1)" about conventional and low-rank and sparse decomposition (model-based methods), and 2) "Traditional and Recent Approaches for Infrared Small Target Detection: Overview, Challenges and Perspectives (Part 2)" about deep learning models (data-based methods).
Figures & tables
Surveys [Authors (Date)]
Surveyed Categories (Number of Reviewed Papers)
Bai et al. ( 47 ) (2011)
Traditional Unsupervised Models (30 papers)
Zhang and Peng. ( 48 ) (2019)
Low-rank and Sparse Decomposition Models (70 papers)
Eysa and Hamdulla ( 49 ) (2019)
Typical Algorithm Principles and Characteristics
Zhao et al. ( 51 ) (2022)
Single Frame Models
Cheng et al. ( 52 ) (2024)
Deep Learning Supervised Models (90 papers)
Kumar and Singh ( 53 ) (2025)
All Categories (90 papers) + Datasets
Table 1: Existing Surveys in Infrared Small Target Detection: An Overview.
Figure 1: Traditional Approaches, Low-rank plus Sparse Decomposition (Model-based) and Deep Neural Networks (Data-based models) : An Overview (with representative models).
Figure 2: From left to right: Ground environment, Air environment, Sea environment.
Table 6: Low-rank plus Sparse Matrix Decomposition for Infrared Small Target Detection: An homogeneous overview (Part 1). m×n is the size of the observation matrix, and r is the rank.
Methods
Decomposition
Minimization
Constraints
Solver
Convexity
Complexity
MoG-MRF (2018)
A=L+S
L,Smin∣∣L∣∣∗+λ∣∣S∣∣l1
A−L−S=0
Variational Bayesian ( 427 )
No
Oiter((m+n)r3+kmnr)
Gao et al. ( 414 )
R S1/2 NIPI (2019)
A=L+S+E
L,Smin∣∣L∣∣S1/21/2+λ∣∣S∣∣l1,WE
A−L−S−E=0 , ∣∣E∣∣≤η
ADMM ( 355 )
No
Oiter(mn+mnmin(m,n)+mnr+mr)
Zhou et al. ( 355 )
WE={wE,ij} : Weights for every entry in the target patch-image matrix
MW-IPI (2019)
A=L+S
L,Smin∣∣L∣∣∗+λ∣∣S∣∣l1
A−L−S=0
ADMM ( 375 )
No
Oiter(mn+mnmin(m,n)+mnr+mr)
Li et al. ( 375 )
Table 7: Low-rank plus Sparse Matrix Decomposition for Infrared Small Target Detection: An homogeneous overview (Part 2). m×n is the size of the observation matrix, and r is the rank.
Table 8: Low-rank plus Sparse Matrix Decomposition for Infrared Small Target Detection: An homogeneous overview (Part 3). m×n is the size of the observation matrix, and r is the rank.
Figure 5: Illustration of the decomposition of an observed tensor A into a low rank tensor L and a sparse tensor S .
Category
Methods
Acronyms
RPCA Tensors Decomposition
Background
Improved IPI (Deng et al. ( 436 ) ), ASTTV (Liu et al. ( 408 ) ), STFF [Tubal] (Lu et al. ( 437 ) )
Target
ReIPT (Dai and Wu ( 337 ) ), ReWIPI (Guo et al. ( 438 ) ), WSNM-STIPT (Sun et al. ( 439 ) )
Facet-LRSD (Dong et al. ( 440 ) ), FDMDEA-STT (Pang et al. ( 441 ) ), STC-LRSD (Fan et al. ( 442 ) )
STTM-SFR (Pang et al. ( 443 ) ), ReIPT-LPM (Li et al. ( 444 ) )
WE [Entropy] (Liu and Wang ( 445 ) ), STBMPT (Aliha et al. ( 446 ) ), Twist Tensor (Li et al. ( 447 ) )
Table 10: Low-rank plus Sparse Tensor Decomposition for Infrared Small Target Detection: An homogeneous overview (Part 1). A∈Rm×n×d is the observation tensor, where m×n is the size of each frontal slice and d is the number of slices (frames or patches), and r is the tensor (tubal) rank.
A5D : 5-D tensor; d : product of non-spatial modes.
Table 11: Low-rank plus Sparse Tensor Decomposition for Infrared Small Target Detection: An homogeneous overview (Part 2). A∈Rm×n×d is the observation tensor, where m×n is the size of each frontal slice and d is the number of slices (frames or patches), and r is the tensor (tubal) rank.
Datasets (Authors) (Date)
Background Features
Target Features
Images/Videos/Resolution
Single/Multi-Frame
Sparse/ Dense
Visual Modality Datasets (28)
NUST-SIRST Dataset (Wang et al. ( 526 ) ) (2019)
Sky, clouds, ground, buildings
Tiny cats, cars, drones, and planes
100 images, 11 sequences (2,098 frames), 256×256
Single/Multi-Frame
Sparse
DAUB Dataset (Hui et al. ( 528 ) ) (2019)
Sky and complex environments
Dim fixed-wing UAVs
22 sequences, 16,177 frames
Multi-Frame
Sparse
NUAA-SIRST Dataset (Dai et al. ( 529 ) ) (2021)
Sea, clouds and city environments
Extremely dim, tiny targets
427 images, variable resolutions
Single-Frame
Sparse
NUDT-SIRST Dataset (Li et al. ( 151 ) ) (2021)
Cloud, city, sea and field environments
Ships, planes, UAVs
1,327 synthesized images, 256×256
Single-Frame
Sparse
ISDD Dataset (Han et al. ( 544 ) ) (2021)
Complex ocean, inshore and offshore environments
Ships
1,284 images, 500×500
Single-Frame
Mixed
Table 12: Existing Datasets in Infrared Small Target Detection: An Overview (32 Datasets).
Since the rise of supervised deep learning models, researchers have attempted to solve infrared small target detection using various models like convolutional neural networks, GANs, Transformers, Mixture of Experts and recent graph/hypergraph neural networks. Moreover, these deep neural network methods have surpassed the traditional unsupervised models and the low-rank and sparse decomposition unsupervised models reviewed in "Traditional and Recent Approaches for Infrared Small Target Detection : Overview, Challenges and Perspectives (Part 1)". In this context, the aim of this paper is to provide a complete survey of the deep learning models in infrared small target detection. First, we categorize the different approaches found in the literature in terms of their modeling strategies. Then, we discuss them in terms of the critical situations that they claim to handle. Furthermore, we present the specific performance evaluation protocols. Then, we conclude with several promising directions for future research.
Laboratoire MIA La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, 17000, France · ISEN Toulon , Toulon, , France · Laboratoire L3i La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, 17000, France +1
Infrared small target detection (IRSTD) aims to identify long distance small targets from complex infrared backgrounds, and is a fundamental task in remote sensing. Deep learning methods have improved IRSTD by learning discriminative image-to-mask mappings, but such feed-forward designs often underuse physical decomposition structure between targets and backgrounds. Deep unfolding methods partially address this issue by embedding model-driven iterations into neural networks, yet existing designs still operate mainly in image domain and use updates and memory mechanisms that are not fully coupled with underlying optimization process. To address these limitations, we propose Latent Consistent Proximal unfolding network (LCPNet). First, we verify that low-rank prior remains valid in latent representations and perform unfolding in this space, preserving physical constraint while avoiding repeated compression of intermediate states. Second, we derive a Latent Consistent Proximal (LCP) solver that evolves each latent variable from its previous state rather than reconstructing through an indirect residual, and stabilizes small target updates through task-adaptive normalization and gain control. Third, we introduce Shared Optimization Memory (SOM), a common historical state shared by all decomposition variables to provide coordinated guidance across unfolding stages. Extensive experiments on four public benchmarks demonstrate that LCPNet achieves accurate and robust detection with low false-alarm rates, together with competitive efficiency among high-accuracy deep unfolding methods. Model and code are available at Model and code are available at https://github.com/Tianfang-Zhang/LCPNet.
Tianfang Zhang, Lei Li, Chang Liu +3
Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing, 100190, China. · School of Artificial Intelligence, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 100081, China. · School of Information and Communication Engineering and the Laboratory of Imaging Detection and Intelligent Perception, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610054, China.
Infrared small target detection (IRSTD) is a challenging task due to the extremely small size of targets, low signal-to-noise ratios, and heavy background clutter in infrared imagery. While the progress of deep learning has advanced this field, existing methods primarily adopt discriminative paradigms that directly map images to target masks, overlooking the potential of generative modeling. In this paper, we propose DiffIRSTD, a novel generative framework that reformulates infrared small target detection as a background reconstruction problem. Instead of explicitly predicting target regions, we reinterpret small targets as noise-like signals and leverage a diffusion-based model to recover a clean, target-free background from a perturbed input image. The residual between the reconstructed background and the original image is then exploited to highlight candidate target regions, providing explicit cues for subsequent detection. To address the computational cost typically associated with diffusion sampling, we introduce a one-step denoising strategy that enables efficient background reconstruction while maintaining practical inference speed. Furthermore, we present a frequency-guided perception loss to preserve high-frequency background details and focus more on the reconstruction quality of target regions. More importantly, our DiffIRSTD operates as a plug-and-play framework, compatible with existing IRSTD models without increasing the computational complexity of detectors. Extensive experiments on IRSTD-1K, NUAA-SIRST, and NUDT-SIRST datasets demonstrate the superiority of our method, achieving state-of-the-art performance across three benchmarks.