Cross-Scale Sparse Attention for Referring Segmentation in Remote Sensing
Organizations: Westlake Institute for Advanced Study, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China · School of Engineering, Westlake University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China · Beijing National Research Center for Information Science and Technology (BNRist), Tsinghua University, Beijing, China · School of Computer Science, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing, China ·
Abstract
High-resolution remote sensing (RS) imagery provides fine spatial detail over large areas, making it essential for fine-grained scene understanding. Referring Remote Sensing Image Segmentation (RRSIS) aims to segment regions described by natural language, yet many existing methods rely on sequential alignment--fusion pipelines with limited joint modeling of cross-scale visual hierarchies and linguistic dependencies. Moreover, dense attention mechanisms struggle with the sparsity and wide spatial dispersion of RS targets, while current datasets offer limited structured evaluation of multi-target references, multi-hop relational reasoning, and multi-granularity descriptions, limiting both model development and evaluation. To address these challenges, we propose a Cross-Scale Sparse Attention Model (CSSAM), which aligns multiscale visual features with complex referring expressions through two key modules. The Cross-scale Modality-aligned Fusion Module (CMFM) performs unified cross-scale cross-modal fusion, while the Dynamic Multimodal Sparse Hybrid Attention (DMSHA) selectively attends to informative visual--textual tokens, reducing dense visual interactions. Furthermore, we introduce MRRSIS-D, a RRSIS dataset explicitly designed around three core reasoning dimensions: multi-target (M), reference-dependent multi-hop (M), and multi-granularity (M) expressions. Extensive experiments on MRRSIS-D and two public RRSIS benchmarks demonstrate that CSSAM achieves competitive performance across accuracy, fine-grained reasoning, and high-IoU localization metrics, validating its effectiveness for complex semantic reasoning in realistic RS scenarios. Code, dataset, and model weights will be released upon acceptance.
Figures & tables
| Dataset | # Images | # Expressions | M 1 | M 2 | M 3 |
| RefSegRS [ 7 ] | 4,420 | 4,420 | ✗ | ||
| RRSIS-D [ 8 ] | 17,402 | 17,402 | ✗ | ✗ | |
| M 3 RRSIS-D (Ours) | 5,603 | 66,305 |
| Method | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | oIoU | mIoU |
| CMPC [ 16 ] | 64.07 | 57.61 | 49.32 | 37.23 | 19.61 | 71.70 | 57.50 |
| CMPC+ [ 18 ] | 64.03 | 57.71 | 49.64 | 37.43 | 20.14 | 71.32 | 57.08 |
| LAVT [ 6 ] | 73.35 | 67.83 | 61.02 | 49.99 | 30.03 | 80.42 | 65.93 |
| RMSIN [ 8 ] | 63.75 | 58.00 | 51.02 | 41.98 | 27.60 | 76.50 | 58.03 |
| FIANet [ 9 ] | 79.65 | 74.16 | 67.45 | 56.11 | 33.55 | 80.77 | 72.63 |
| RSRefSeg-l [ 10 ] | 74.86 | 70.46 | 64.45 | 55.32 | 36.90 | 80.85 | 67.99 |
| (a) Reasoning dimensions | ||||||
| Subset | Method | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | oIoU | mIoU |
| M 1 | LAVT [ 6 ] | 63.25 | 44.61 | 18.46 | 76.74 | 57.71 |
| FIANet [ 9 ] | 64.72 | 41.68 | 16.27 | 72.43 | 58.99 | |
| RSRefSeg-l [ 10 ] | 63.13 | 44.59 | 18.14 | 71.63 | 57.10 | |
| CSSAM (Ours) | 68.24 | 52.00 | 19.54 | 74.35 | 63.94 | |
| M 2 | LAVT [ 6 ] | 65.04 | 52.82 | 25.27 | 78.93 | 58.93 |
| Category | Configuration | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | oIoU | mIoU | |
| Module design | CMFM | DMSHA | |||||
| ✓ | ✓ | 83.86 | 74.36 | 39.94 | 82.45 | 75.42 | |
| ✗ | ✗ | 62.64 | 46.02 | 18.90 | 69.98 | 57.05 | |
| ✓ | ✗ | 75.55 | 62.93 | 27.82 | 73.35 | 65.13 | |
| ✗ | ✓ | 79.46 | 67.52 | 33.94 | 80.76 | 70.95 | |
| CMFM: identity visual attention | 76.87 | 64.14 | 30.95 | 79.21 | 68.97 | ||
| [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | oIoU | mIoU | Peak mem. | Avg. mem. | Latency | Through- put | |
| 2 | 80.29 | 64.33 | 32.20 | 80.00 | 70.82 | 14.30 | 14.09 | 127.86 | 7.82 |
| 4 | 83.86 | 74.36 | 39.94 | 82.45 | 75.42 | 17.25 | 16.95 | 130.42 | 7.67 |
| 6 | 84.70 | 74.43 | 40.32 | 82.95 | 75.99 | 21.98 | 21.37 | 134.14 | 7.46 |
| 8 | 84.92 | 75.87 | 40.39 | 83.02 | 76.03 | 23.51 | 23.33 | 157.84 | 6.34 |
| 10 | 84.95 | 75.92 | 40.40 | 83.08 | 76.09 | 23.55 | 23.47 | 164.32 | 6.09 |
| Dense counterpart | OOM | ||||||||
| Method | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | oIoU | mIoU |
| CMPC [ 16 ] | 55.83 | 47.40 | 36.94 | 25.45 | 9.19 | 69.22 | 49.24 |
| CMPC+ [ 18 ] | 57.65 | 47.51 | 36.97 | 24.33 | 7.78 | 68.64 | 50.24 |
| LAVT [ 6 ] | 66.93 | 60.99 | 51.71 | 39.79 | 23.99 | 76.58 | 59.05 |
| RMSIN [ 8 ] | 71.96 | 65.76 | 55.16 | 42.03 | 25.02 | 76.50 | 62.27 |
| FIANet [ 9 ] | 74.46 | 66.96 | 56.31 | 42.83 | 24.13 | 76.91 | 64.01 |
| RSRefSeg-l [ 10 ] | 74.49 | 68.33 | 58.73 | 48.50 | 30.80 | 77.24 | 64.67 |
| Method | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | [email protected] | oIoU | mIoU |
| LAVT [ 6 ] | 70.23 | 55.53 | 30.05 | 14.42 | 4.07 | 76.21 | 57.30 |
| RMSIN [ 8 ] | 71.60 | 55.97 | 31.87 | 11.72 | 1.93 | 71.73 | 57.78 |
| FIANet [ 9 ] | 84.09 | 77.05 | 61.86 | 33.41 | 7.10 | 78.32 | 68.67 |
| HTVG [ 20 ] | 83.60 | 76.06 | 63.02 | 32.58 | 7.26 | 80.12 | 68.81 |
| SBANet [ 23 ] | 77.02 | – | 44.15 | – | 8.97 | 79.86 | 62.73 |
| DiffRIS [ 24 ] | 74.57 | 64.56 | 46.51 | 24.49 | 5.78 | 76.18 | 62.38 |
Referring Image Segmentation
Referring image segmentation maps a natural-language description of an object or region to its pixels in an image.
See all 45 papers