From Sentinel-2 to 1-m Imagery: Real-World ×10 Cross-Sensor Super-Resolution via Visual Autoregressive Modeling
Authors: Tailai Chen, Yuluxin Fu, Jie Deng, Shu Luo, Yanan Wu, Danfeng Hong
Organizations: College of Water Resources and Intelligence Engineering, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China · College of Information and Electrical Engineering, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, China · Institute of Automation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China · University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China · Aerospace Information Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China · Beijing Key Laboratory of Precision Forestry, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100091, China · School of Automation, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
Reconstructing 1-m imagery from Sentinel-2 combines two difficulties. The input and the reference are observed by different satellites, which differ in spatial resolution, spectral response, radiometry, acquisition time, and local geometry, so no synthetic degradation operator links them. The required magnification of ten in each spatial dimension also far exceeds the factors of two to four at which remote sensing super-resolution is usually developed. We study this real-world ×10 problem using YREB-SR, which pairs 2022 Sentinel-2 RGB composites with 2022 Jilin-1 RGB references resampled to a 1-m grid over the Yangtze River Economic Belt. The benchmark contains 11,559 geographically matched scene pairs, with 6,409, 2,135, and 3,015 assigned to training, validation, and testing, respectively. We develop CrossVAR, a visual autoregressive model that predicts the 1-m latent as a nine-scale hierarchy conditioned on the Sentinel-2 input and estimates the remaining quantization residual with a diffusion refiner run without injected noise. Complete 1600 × 1600 scenes are reconstructed in overlapping windows that start on the Sentinel-2 pixel grid, as every training patch does, and every window is decoded at the size on which the decoder was trained before the windows are blended with Gaussian weights. On all 3,015 test scenes, CrossVAR achieves 27.60 dB PSNR, 0.7725 SSIM, 0.1451 LPIPS, and 7.15 FID, the best value of each metric among the compared methods. These results establish a strong autoregressive baseline for large-scale cross-sensor reconstruction. To facilitate reproducibility, the source code and implementation are publicly available at https://github.com/SHANOAL/RSSR.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: PSNR and model time per complete 1600×1600 test scene of YREB-SR. Marker area grows with the number of parameters.
Fig. 2: Spatial distribution of the 11,559 cross-sensor scene pairs in YREB-SR across the Yangtze River Economic Belt. Colors indicate the training, validation, and test subsets, while blue lines represent the Yangtze River network.
Attribute
Setting
Cross-sensor image pairs
Sensor pair
Sentinel-2 RGB → 1-m RGB reference
Spectral channels
B4–B3–B2 → R–G–B
Nominal GSD
10 m → 1 m ( ×10 )
Full-scene grids
160×160→1600×1600 pixels
Training grids
40×40→400×400 pixels
TABLE I: Summary of the YREB-SR Benchmark
Fig. 3: Overview of CrossVAR. Panels 1 to 3 reconstruct one window. The condition encoder maps the Sentinel-2 window, resized to the output grid, to one condition token per latent position, and the next-scale transformer predicts nine code maps from 1×1 to 25×25 . Deterministic residual refinement (DRR) estimates the residual of the codes without injected noise, and the frozen VQ decoder outputs the 1-m window. Aligned window decoding (AWD) in panel 4 starts every window of a complete scene on the input pixel grid, reconstructs it through panels 1 to 3, and blends the decoded windows with Gaussian weights.
Method
Batch
Steps
EDSR-baseline
16
150k
SwinIR
8
150k
TTST
4
150k
Real-ESRGAN+
4
150k
TABLE II: Training Budgets of the Retrained Baselines
Method
Representation
PSNR (dB) ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
FID ↓
Reconstruction and continuous-representation methods
Bicubic
Interpolation
14.5051
0.4626
0.9534
215.9498
EDSR-baseline [ 10 ]
CNN
24.0986
0.6596
0.6831
68.2941
SwinIR [ 11 ]
Transformer
24.5078
0.6706
0.6371
58.0257
TTST [ 12 ]
RS transformer
24.7157
0.6739
0.6201
48.9027
Thera [ 19 ]
Neural field
25.2978
0.6855
0.5679
37.8334
TABLE III: Full-Scene ×10 Reconstruction on YREB-SR. All Reported Scores Use the Same 3,015 Test Pairs. Best and Second-Best Results Are Bold and Underlined.
Baseline
Δ PSNR (dB)
Δ SSIM
Δ LPIPS
Better (%)
EDSR-baseline
+3.50
+0.113
− 0.538
100
SwinIR
+3.09
+0.102
− 0.492
100
TTST
+2.89
+0.099
− 0.475
100
Thera
+2.30
+0.087
− 0.423
100
Real-ESRGAN+
+5.64
+0.155
− 0.182
100
Satlas-SR
+4.30
+0.140
− 0.070
100
TABLE IV: Scene-Wise Comparison of CrossVAR with the Retrained Baselines on the 3,015 Test Scenes. Differences Are CrossVAR Minus Baseline, and the Last Column Gives the Share of Scenes on Which CrossVAR Is Better in All Three Metrics.
Fig. 4: Scene-wise analysis on the 3,015 test scenes. (a) Radially averaged power spectrum of the reconstructions relative to the Jilin-1 reference. The dotted line marks the Nyquist frequency of the Sentinel-2 input. (b) Mean PSNR in quartiles of the mean gradient magnitude of the reference. (c) PSNR gain of CrossVAR over Thera at the scene centers.
Method
Parameters (M)
Precision
Model time
I/O-inclusive
Peak memory
Bicubic
–
CPU
26.44
127.91
–
EDSR-baseline
1.39
FP32
2.92
384.07
124
SwinIR
11.99
FP32
106.41
440.12
499
TTST
21.76
FP32
189.63
503.57
1,632
Thera
5.85
FP32
303.50
717.46
4,534
Real-ESRGAN+
20.32
FP32
44.96
446.78
2,283
TABLE V: Full-Scene Efficiency. Times Are Milliseconds per Scene and Memory Is Peak MiB.
Fig. 5: Coarse-to-fine reconstruction. (a) Four test windows decoded after the 13×13 , 18×18 , and 25×25 code maps and after deterministic residual refinement, with PSNR against the Jilin-1 reference. (b) Mean PSNR after every scale on 427 validation scenes, with the interquartile range shaded.
Fig. 6: Complete-scene and local-detail comparisons on four test scenes. Seven learned methods are shown between the Sentinel-2 input and the Jilin-1 reference, and red and blue boxes mark the enlarged regions. Only the Sentinel-2 input is contrast-stretched for display.
Fig. 7: PSNR change of single windows on 427 validation scenes when the window start is moved away from the Sentinel-2 pixel grid. The outlined cell is the aligned start.
DRR
AWD
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
FID ↓
25.93
0.6960
0.1796
10.29
✓
26.27
0.7076
0.1695
9.81
✓
27.01
0.7509
0.1539
6.38
✓
✓
27.60
0.7725
0.1451
7.15
TABLE VI: Ablation of Deterministic Residual Refinement (DRR) and Aligned Window Decoding (AWD) on the 3,015 Test Scenes
Windows
Fusion
Decoding
PSNR ↑
SSIM ↑
LPIPS ↓
FID ↓
On grid
None
Scene
26.39
0.7406
0.1804
10.98
Off grid
Latent
Scene
26.27
0.7076
0.1695
9.81
Off grid
Latent
Window
26.51
0.7145
0.1595
8.94
Off grid
RGB
Window
26.45
0.7131
0.1558
7.96
On grid
Latent
Scene
27.26
0.7645
0.1609
9.08
On grid
Latent
Window
27.58
0.7708
0.1506
8.21
TABLE VII: Complete-Scene Assembly Rules with τ=0 on the 3,015 Test Scenes
Demand for high-resolution satellite imagery has increased interest in super-resolution (SR) to bridge the spatial resolution gap between freely available missions such as Sentinel-2 and commercial systems like PlanetScope. Because no sensor provides true paired low- and high-resolution observations, SR models are usually trained on synthetically degraded data, creating a domain gap on real cross-sensor imagery. In this work, we provide the first systematic study of how this synthetic-to-real mismatch affects the performance of modern diffusion-based SR models. Using a large, geometrically and temporally aligned dataset of Sentinel-2 and PlanetScope imagery, we evaluate five state-of-the-art diffusion architectures under controlled experimental settings. We also introduce LPIPS-Sat, a domain-adapted perceptual metric based on Sentinel-2 self-supervised features. Our results show two persistent challenges: synthetically trained models degrade sharply on real pairs, while models trained on real cross-sensor data exhibit optimisation difficulties and struggle to adapt to the physical and radiometric diversity. These findings highlight a key limitation of current SR and motivate methods that disentangle super-resolution from domain adaptation.
Dawid Kopeć, Katarzyna Jabłońska, Wojciech Kozłowski +1
Developing robust techniques for super-resolution of satellite imagery involves navigating commonly observed trade-offs between spectral fidelity and perceptual quality. In this work, we introduce a flow matching model for 4x super-resolution of 10-m Sentinel-2 visible and near-infrared bands over the conterminous United States (CONUS) using a dataset of 120,851 10-m Sentinel-2 and 2.5-m resampled NAIP imagery pairs acquired on the same day. Our results showed that the flow matching model outperformed diffusion and Real-ESRGAN models in pixel-wise accuracy in a single sampling step using the Euler method. When evaluated with a second-order Midpoint solver, our model generated perceptually realistic super-resolved imagery in only 20 sampling steps, effectively navigating the perception-distortion trade-off at inference time without retraining. We used this model to produce a super-resolved 2.5-m 4-band CONUS imagery product derived from 2025 10-m Sentinel-2 annual composites, consisting of over 1.58 trillion pixels. We further evaluated the use of super-resolved data on a land cover classification task using semantic segmentation models. Finally, we generated a yearly 2.5-m land cover product for the Chesapeake Bay watershed for 2020-2025. An accuracy assessment against 25,000 ground truth points revealed an overall accuracy of 89.11% for the annual land cover product. We conclude that flow matching is an effective generative modeling approach for super-resolution of Sentinel-2 imagery compared to diffusion and Generative Adversarial Network-based methods, and has strong implications for expanding access to high-resolution imagery for geospatial applications that demand fine spatial detail.
Dakota Hester, Vitor S. Martins, Lucas B. Ferreira +2
Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Mississippi State University · North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University
Diffusion models now give the best perceptual quality in super-resolution (SR), but their architecture and training confine them to small fixed crops. Operational remote sensing needs seamless scenes orders of magnitude larger. Joint denoising fuses overlapping tiles at every reverse step and lets text-to-image diffusion generate beyond its training crop, but it assumes deterministic ODE samplers. With the stochastic sampler of SR models such as SR3, the averaging also partly cancels independent per-tile noise. This known variance erosion blurs the detail SR should recover and must be corrected. We carry variance-corrected fusion to conditional SR and derive Spatially-Decoupled Variance Correction (SDVC), an exact reformulation that replaces per-step global normalization with independent per-tile contributions accumulated in one additive pass. SDVC turns the coupled per-step computation into independent tile-local work, so the resulting pipeline, InfScene-SR, runs in parallel across GPUs and makes SR of arbitrarily large scenes feasible. On a 5× SR task built from NAIP aerial imagery, we evaluate whole scenes with fidelity, perceptual, seam-continuity, and faithfulness metrics. Under one backbone, InfScene-SR is the only fusion strategy that is seamless and sharp at once, the closest to the low-resolution observation among those that synthesize detail, and within 0.003 IoU of native high-resolution imagery on downstream invasive-plant segmentation. Code is available at https://github.com/TitorX/infscene-sr.
Shoukun Sun, Zhe Wang, Xiang Que +2
University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA · NCEAS, UC Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, USA · Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou, China