Open-vocabulary segmentation (OVS) enables models to segment a variety of concepts specified in natural language, removing the need for fixed label sets and fine-tuning. While recent OVS approaches have shown strong performance on natural images, they transfer poorly to Earth observation (EO) data due to differing semantics, scales, sensing modality, and geographic context. To date, large-scale EO-specific datasets and benchmarks for OVS remain scarce. We, therefore, introduce TerraMesh-Masks, a large-scale open-vocabulary segmentation dataset for EO, comprising 16 million binary masks aligned with nine million multimodal TerraMesh samples and annotated using OpenStreetMap and Overture-derived semantics. In addition, we provide an expert-reviewed evaluation set of 523 samples covering over 200 classes to enable robust evaluation. To demonstrate the impact of TerraMesh-Masks, we build an open-vocabulary version of TerraMind. Our results demonstrate significantly improved performance over general-purpose state-of-the-art models reaching 35.18% IoU versus 16.29% for DINOv3.txt and 11.33% for SAM-3. We release the dataset publicly under a permissive license at https://huggingface.co/datasets/ibm-esa-geospatial/TerraMesh-Masks.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Average IoU pos results per group on TerraMesh-Masks-Eval. While other models struggle with most categories, TerraMind-OVS performs particularly well on tasks related to land cover. Building-related categories are generally challenging due to many small masks which are best identified by GeoPixel.
Dataset
Number of images
Vocabulary size
Modalities
Resolution
Image source
Annotation source
License
GeoPixelD [ 3 ]
18.7k
53k
RGB
∼ 1m
iSAID
Source labels
CC-BY 4.0
MM-OVSeg [ 17 ]
25k
unknown
RGB, SAR
0.5–3 m
SpaceNet6; DFC2023
unknown
unknown
LandDiscover50K [ 15 ]
51k
40
RGB
high-res
9 datasets
Source labels
MIT
RemoteSAM-270K [ 4 ]
270k
1000
RGB
high-res
10 datasets
Source labels
CC-BY 4.0
EarthMind [ 18 ]
>500k
unknown
Optical, SAR
various
7+ datasets
Source labels
Apache 2.0
TerraMesh-Masks (ours)
9M
44k
S1, S2, RGB, DEM
10m
TerraMesh
Overture, OpenStreetMap
ODbL
Table 1: Overview of existing remote sensing datasets for OVS. Most datasets focus on high-resolution imagery. Some dataset licenses might not reflect source dataset restrictions.
Figure 2: TerraMesh-Masks samples drawn from the manually reviewed Eval set. Each patch is shown with a mask overlay and its open-vocabulary class label, country, and a synonym set.
Figure 3: Our dataset creation pipeline pairs TerraMesh samples with Overture and OpenStreetMap annotations. For each sample, we compute heuristics based on subtype, location, polygon size, and previous LLM quality scores. The sampled annotation is processed by Mistral-Large-3 which first scores the annotation quality and then generates the class label and synonyms. The annotations are further subsampled with an NDVI-based filtering for pretraining. We tasked experts to manually review a subset of the dataset to obtain a high-quality evaluation dataset.
Figure 4: Tokenizer architecture for discretizing binary segmentation masks into tokens. The tokens are later used as training targets of TerraMind-OVS, while the ViT decoder is used during inference.
Figure 5: Overview of our model architecture. Multimodal inputs are patchified and encoded with TerraMind. The text query is encoded using a frozen CLIP text encoder followed by an MLP. Both embeddings are used as context by the TerraMind decoder to predict the binary mask tokens. During inference, the predicted tokens are de-tokenized to generate binary segmentation masks.
Figure 6: Qualitative comparison on examples from TerraMesh-Masks-Eval. TerraMind performs well on larger land-cover related labels, while GeoPixel is better in spotting objects. Other models lean towards overprediction or no prediction.
Figure 7: Eval mIoU results per semantic group for TerraMind-OVS-B with different modality inputs. S2 and RGB perform compareable, while S1 and DEM significalty reduce the performance.
Model
Param.
Training
Input
IoU pos
mIoU
F1
Precision
Recall
SAM-3
841M
RGB
RGB
11.33 ± 2.30
10.97 ± 1.39
13.32 ± 2.54
12.86 ± 2.58
20.97 ± 3.33
RemoteSAM
242M
RGB
RGB
14.79 ± 2.13
30.42 ± 1.81
19.62 ± 2.48
20.60 ± 2.84
50.19 ± 3.49
DINOv3.txt
867M
RGB
RGB
16.29 ± 1.87
41.40 ± 1.42
23.14 ± 2.28
24.70 ± 2.72
51.53 ± 3.50
DINO Soars
869M
RGB
RGB
19.49 ± 2.55
44.29 ± 1.93
24.57 ± 2.83
23.65 ± 2.92
48.43 ± 3.98
SegEarth-OV
150M
RGB
RGB
21.59 ± 2.47
48.38 ± 1.53
28.01 ± 2.77
30.81 ± 3.10
45.34 ± 3.51
GeoPixel
11.3B
RGB
RGB
15.06 ± 1.99
49.25 ± 1.58
20.62 ± 2.41
40.27 ± 3.69
20.15 ± 2.57
Table 2: TerraMesh-Masks-Eval results with Student-t 95% confidence intervals, each metric averaged over the 523 per-sample results. Some TerraMind versions (TM-OVS) are trained on multimodal data that includes S1, S2, RGB, and DEM. Best results are in bold, second-best results are underlined.
Figure 8: These predictions from TerraMind-OVS-L (S2) show that the model does not have an understanding of clouds , snow , and other weather patterns as these are not included in the annotations. The model covers a range of concepts, but can still fail for related terms like dirt track or terminal .
Model
CaFFe (OOD)
reBEN-7k (Test split)
reBEN-7k (OOD split)
mIoU (%)
F1 (%)
mIoU (%)
F1 (%)
mIoU (%)
F1 (%)
DINOv3.txt
15.32
22.64
3.52
5.20
3.07
4.60
SAM-3
1.00
1.24
7.30
1.00
8.76
1.03
TerraMind-OVS-S
14.57
22.82
10.93
18.40
11.26
17.59
TerraMind-OVS-S (S2)
14.35
22.29
11.46
19.25
14.06
21.23
TerraMind-OVS-B
9.10
14.14
13.75
22.23
16.54
24.32
Table 3: Open-vocabulary segmentation performance across two multi-label datasets: CaFFe [ 26 ] and reBEN-7k [ 25 , 27 ] . Thresholds for SAM-3 are optimized over the test set for maximum performance.
Appendix figures & tables12 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 9: Modality examples in TerraMesh. We exclude NDVI and LULC from training and from the Eval subset as these modalities are related to specific semantic classes and might bias OVS models.
Figure 10: Spatiotemporal distribution of the TerraMesh source dataset with (a) sample count visualized on a one degree map, and (b) monthly temporal distribution of its subsets using the S2 timestamps.
Figure 11: Geographic distribution of the 523 samples in TerraMesh-Masks-Eval, coloured by their source dataset.
Figure 12: Additional examples from the TerraMesh-Masks-Eval set. Each patch is shown with a polygon mask overlay and its open-vocabulary class label, country, and a synonym set.
Id
Group name
Sample
Unique
Examples
count
labels
1
Inland water
63
14
reservoir, river, stream, canal, lake
2
Coastal water
45
12
coastal bay, ocean, bay, sea, coral reef
3
Coastal land
39
16
islet, coastal island, island, peninsula
4
Forest & wetland
30
9
forest, mangrove forest, wetland, mangrove
5
Grass & shrubland
12
8
scrubland, meadow, shrubland, hedge
Appendix
Table 4: Overview of the assigned label groups based on manual review and grouping of 200+ class labels in TerraMesh-Masks-Eval. We display the most common class names of each group.
Figure 13: Wrong or challenging annotations. The dataset contains several noisy labels, while water-related classes are often very precise.
Figure 14: Example of the provided information to the reviewers when creating the TerraMesh-Masks-Eval dataset. Based on this information, reviewers rated the image-mask-text combination as valid , invalid , or unsure .
Figure 15: Label-wise mIoU results of all 207 labels in the eval set, sorted per model.
Figure 16: Qualitative comparison on examples from TerraMesh-Masks-Eval. SAM- and DINOv3-based models often lead towards overprediction or no prediction. TerraMind-OVS performs well on larger land-cover related labels, while GeoPixel is much better in spotting objects.
Model
Inland water
Coastal water
Coastal land
Forest & wet.
Grass & shrub.
Agriculture
Barren terrain
Airport
Transport
Utilities
Industry
Settlements
Civic & inst.
Recreation
Mean
IoU pos
SAM-3
20.49
43.58
22.77
3.48
5.84
5.26
12.91
4.66
0.00
0.14
10.90
11.97
1.08
0.77
10.28
RemoteSAM
6.24
19.98
27.29
32.51
28.95
17.89
36.96
13.92
5.04
4.51
9.71
13.76
2.48
9.50
16.34
DINOv3.txt
11.22
42.05
23.41
26.12
8.32
17.03
21.80
12.58
4.57
5.09
19.76
26.55
7.90
4.96
16.53
DINO Soars
11.79
58.89
21.89
39.29
16.10
13.99
42.61
16.97
1.52
5.90
20.56
26.47
3.54
2.96
20.18
SegEarth-OV
16.82
57.85
23.32
39.14
18.62
18.89
46.84
10.99
3.89
5.76
18.36
33.13
7.20
5.87
21.91
GeoPixel
9.60
19.65
19.51
20.01
7.26
16.59
13.76
19.13
16.56
4.47
25.32
20.26
12.46
11.26
15.42
Appendix
Table 5: IoU results on TerraMesh-Masks-Eval per group. All models are using RGB inputs, except for the last two rows in each block, which show TerraMind-OVS-L with S2 L2A inputs.
Figure 17: IoU pos against ground-truth mask area on TerraMesh-Masks-Eval for the EO-specific models, binned into log-spaced quintiles. Error bars show 95% confidence intervals.
Figure 18: Predictions on CaFFe with TerraMind-OVS-S.
In remote sensing, open-vocabulary segmentation is particularly important for flexible and scalable land-cover understanding across diverse regions, as it improves generalization to novel categories without requiring exhaustive pixel-level annotations. Despite its great promise, progress in this area remains largely constrained by existing datasets with limited category coverage and overly coarse taxonomies, and therefore struggles to support fine-grained semantic understanding required in real-world applications such as urban functional zoning, carbon accounting, and post-disaster assessment. To address these challenges, we present OpenEarth-OVS44, a multimodal benchmark with 290,587 expert-verified segments from 2,832 RGB images and 1,341 strictly registered RGB-SAR pairs at sub-meter spatial resolution, covering 40 cities across France, Japan, and the United States under a unified 44-class taxonomy organized into 9 base categories. Three evaluation tracks are provided: an RGB-only fine-grained benchmark, a multimodal track with diverse synthetic cloudy conditions for weather-robust evaluation, and a held-out cross-region track. Extensive experiments on representative open-vocabulary segmentation models demonstrate that training on OpenEarth-OVS44 substantially improves fine-grained segmentation performance over the strongest training-free baseline, with improvements of up to 7.1 mIoU points on unseen categories and 27.6 mIoU points on seen categories. The dataset and code will be released.
Yimin Wei, Hongruixuan Chen, Hao Zheng +5
The University of Tokyo · RIKEN AIP · East China Normal University +1
Open-vocabulary Earth observation (EO) aims to localize geospatial concepts specified in natural language rather than a fixed label set. Existing benchmarks, however, usually cover narrow category vocabularies or limited query forms. To fill this gap, we introduce OVEarth-Bench, which extends existing evaluation in two directions: category breadth, through broad hierarchical category coverage with positive and negative expressions, and query diversity, through vocabulary, referring, and reasoning queries. The benchmark supports mask and box localization under a unified zero-shot protocol. We evaluate a broad set of general and EO-specific methods. The evaluation reveals that: (1) the performance of current methods remains limited, while broader category coverage yields more stable model rankings; (2) MLLM-based methods achieve the strongest overall performance; and (3) EO-specific methods generally underperform general models and rarely match the strongest methods. These findings provide guidance for future open-vocabulary EO method design and highlight the importance of developing more realistic, diverse, high-quality, and large-scale benchmarks for reliable evaluation. Our data and evaluation package are released at https://earth-insights.github.io/OVEarth-bench.
Open-vocabulary remote sensing image segmentation (OVRSIS) aims to segment text-specified categories beyond a fixed label space. Its key challenge is to maintain reliable pixel--text correspondence under substantial appearance variation in remote-sensing imagery. Existing methods often rely on specialized vision--language representations or complex adaptation mechanisms, yet still perform deterministic matching between fixed text prototypes and individual visual features. We instead formulate OVRSIS as a distributional pixel--text alignment problem and propose Pi-Seg, a lightweight perturbation-based framework. Pi-Seg introduces learnable variations into textual prototypes and dense visual features before alignment. Segmentation supervision encourages perturbations that enlarge the target-to-distractor margin while suppressing harmful feature shifts. Pi-Seg consistently improves performance under the existing single-source OVRSISBench protocols. To evaluate OVRSIS beyond source-specific training settings, we further introduce a unified multi-source protocol and construct GlobalRSOV95K, containing approximately 95K densely annotated images and 35 semantic categories. Models are trained on this shared dataset and evaluated on an image-disjoint suite of 10 downstream datasets. The complete benchmark covers more than 170K images and 122 categories. Experiments under both single-source and multi-source protocols show that Pi-Seg improves cross-dataset transfer and generalizes effectively to practical geospatial segmentation tasks, while GlobalRSOV95K provides a common foundation for transferable OVRSIS research. \footnote{https://github.com/LiBingyu01/Pi-Seg}
Bingyu Li, Tao Huo, Haocheng Dong +4
Department of Electronic Engineering and Information Science, University of Science and Technology of China, China · Institute of Artificial Intelligence (TeleAI), China Telecom, P. R. China · School of Artificial Intelligence, OPtics and ElectroNics (iOPEN), Northwestern Polytechnical University, China