mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Rethinking Electro-Optical Vision Foundation Models for Remote Sensing Retrieval: A Controlled Comparison with Generalist VFM

arXiv 2605.02283 ↗First posted 4 May 2026cs.CV cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Vision foundation models have attracted significant attention for their ability to leverage large-scale unlabeled visual data. This advantage is particularly important in remote sensing, where data acquisition is costly and annotation often requires expert knowledge. Recent electro-optical vision foundation models aim to learn domain-specific representations from remote sensing imagery, but it remains unclear whether they are more effective than strong generalist vision foundation models under retrieval-based evaluation. In this study, we conduct a controlled comparison between representative EO-specific and generalist vision foundation models for remote sensing image retrieval. Using the same datasets, retrieval protocol, and evaluation metric, we evaluate both in-domain performance and cross-scene generalization. Our results show that strong generalist vision foundation models are competitive with, and in some cases outperform, existing EO-specific models. Moreover, EO-specific models often suffer from substantial degradation under cross-scene evaluation, while generalist models show more stable transfer. These findings suggest that EO pretraining alone does not guarantee stronger retrieval-oriented remote sensing representations. We discuss the limitations of current EO-specific pretraining strategies and highlight the need for future EO vision foundation models to better exploit the physical, spatial, spectral, and geographic characteristics of remote sensing imagery.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 May 2026.

Builds on

22 of 26 references.

References · 22

  1. 2021Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervisioncited by 33,456
  2. 2023DINOv2: Learning Robust Visual Features without Supervisioncited by 7,764
  3. 2021Masked Autoencoders Are Scalable Vision Learnerscited by 7,339
  4. 2021Emerging Properties in Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 6,893
  5. 2021BEiT: BERT Pre-Training of Image Transformerscited by 2,360
  6. 2021An Empirical Study of Training Self-Supervised Vision Transformerscited by 1,610
  7. 2025DINOv3cited by 1,297
  8. 2022SatMAE: Pre-training Transformers for Temporal and Multi-Spectral Satellite Imagerycited by 402
  9. 2023RemoteCLIP: A Vision Language Foundation Model for Remote Sensingcited by 357
  10. 2017Functional Map of the Worldcited by 338
  11. 2022Scale-MAE: A Scale-Aware Masked Autoencoder for Multiscale Geospatial Representation Learningcited by 302
  12. 2019BigEarthNet: A Large-Scale Benchmark Archive For Remote Sensing Image Understandingcited by 231
10 more
  1. 2022Advancing Plain Vision Transformer Towards Remote Sensing Foundation Modelcited by 149
  2. 2023Foundation Models for Generalist Geospatial Artificial Intelligencecited by 143
  3. 2023Towards Geospatial Foundation Models via Continual Pretrainingcited by 109
  4. 2022An Empirical Study of Remote Sensing Pretrainingcited by 105
  5. 2024Rethinking Transformers Pre-training for Multi-Spectral Satellite Imagerycited by 82
  6. 2022Masked Vision and Language Modeling for Multi-modal Representation Learningcited by 66
  7. 2024Exploring Masked Autoencoders for Sensor-Agnostic Image Retrieval in Remote Sensingcited by 12
  8. 2025Upsample Anything: A Simple and Hard to Beat Baseline for Feature Upsamplingcited by 6
  9. 2025REJEPA: A Novel Joint-Embedding Predictive Architecture for Efficient Remote Sensing Image Retrievalcited by 4
  10. 2026StreamTTO: Efficient Online Test-Time Optimization for Video Depth Completioncited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.