Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 44 references

A Large-Scale Referring Remote Sensing Image Segmentation Dataset and Benchmark

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper introduces NWPU-Refer, the largest referring remote sensing segmentation dataset to date, and MRSNet, which sets a new state of the art on it.

desk verdict NWPU-Refer is a genuinely useful new RRSIS resource, but the 'largest' claim is contradicted by the paper's own Table I and the experimental validation is too thin to support the SOTA claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.03583 v1 pith:HLG37QWY submitted 2025-06-04 cs.CV

Zhigang Yang , Huiguang Yao , Linmao Tian , Xuezhi Zhao , Qiang Li , Qi Wang This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords referringimagesegmentationremotesensingdatasetbenchmarkmulti-scalefeatureinteractionvisual-linguisticalignmentNWPU-ReferMRSNet
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out to fix a gap in referring remote sensing image segmentation: existing datasets are too small, low-resolution, and biased toward simple scenes with a single salient object. It introduces NWPU-Refer, which it claims is the largest and most diverse RRSIS dataset to date, with 15,003 high-resolution images, 49,745 manual annotations, and coverage of single-object, multi-object, and non-object queries across 30-plus countries. It also proposes MRSNet, a network that combines intra-scale feature interaction with hierarchical cross-scale fusion, and reports that it outperforms existing methods on the new benchmark, reaching 44.86 mIoU on the validation set. If the dataset holds up, it gives the field a more realistic and challenging common test bed.

What carries the argument

The central objects are the NWPU-Refer dataset and the MRSNet architecture. NWPU-Refer provides 32 target categories, six annotation dimensions (size, spatial relationship, color, category relation, motion state, associative relation), and bilingual text, with masks drawn manually by three annotators and reviewed by a senior annotator. MRSNet's load-bearing mechanisms are IFIM, which at each encoder stage refines features in both spatial and frequency domains through a pyramidal spatial-spectral submodule, models inter-target relations with a graph-convolution submodule, and aligns visual and linguistic features via a cross-modal align submodule; and HFIM, which integrates features across encoder scales using PixelShuffle-based resolution alignment plus spatial and frequency self-attention. Together these modules let the network capture fine details, multi-scale objects, and text-guided target selection in a single pipeline.

What would settle it

Take a random sample of NWPU-Refer images, have independent expert annotators redraw the masks, and compute pixel-level agreement (e.g., mean IoU between annotators). If agreement is substantially below the level assumed by the reported benchmark numbers, or if models trained on a cleaned re-annotation score much differently, the dataset's reliability as a benchmark is not established.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that NWPU-Refer is the largest and most diverse RRSIS dataset to date, containing 15,003 high-resolution remote sensing images (1024-2048px, 0.12-0.5m resolution) from over 30 countries, with 49,745 manually produced annotations that span single-object, multi-object, and non-object referring expressions, in both English and Chinese. The paper further claims that its proposed MRSNet, built around an Intra-scale Feature Interaction Module (IFIM) and a Hierarchical Feature Integration Module (HFIM), achieves state-of-the-art results on this benchmark, with mIoU of 44.86 on the validation set and 43.60 on the test set, outperforming LAVT and RMSIN across most precision thresholds. The dataset is offered as a more realistic benchmark for real-world remote sensing applications, where targets are small, scenes are cluttered, and queries can refer to categories, positions, or absent objects.

Load-bearing premise

The manual annotations are treated as accurate ground truth, but the paper reports no inter-annotator agreement metric, so any systematic labeling error would propagate into every benchmark score.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The field gains a common benchmark that includes high-resolution imagery, cluttered scenes, and queries for multiple or absent objects, enabling fairer comparison of RRSIS models.
  • Models trained on NWPU-Refer should be able to follow category-level expressions such as 'all vehicles' and to reject queries when no target exists, which previous datasets did not test.
  • MRSNet's success indicates that combining fine-scale feature refinement with hierarchical cross-scale fusion is a workable design for language-guided segmentation in remote sensing imagery.
  • The bilingual annotations provide a resource for studying whether referring segmentation models transfer across English and Chinese prompts.
  • With 49,745 manual annotations across 32 categories, the dataset also exposes long-tail category imbalance, which future work will need to address to reach robust real-world performance.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If NWPU-Refer becomes a standard benchmark, it could support pretraining or fine-tuning of larger vision-language models for remote sensing, moving beyond specialized segmentation heads.
  • The absence of an inter-annotator agreement metric means the community should independently audit a sample of masks before treating the benchmark numbers as a hard truth.
  • The annotation pipeline is entirely manual; a natural extension is a semi-automatic pipeline (e.g., human-verified machine proposals) that scales to even larger territory while maintaining a reported agreement level.
  • The explicit support for no-target queries could make it easier to evaluate and improve models' ability to abstain, a property that matters in real monitoring tasks where the described object may not be present.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces NWPU-Refer, an RRSIS dataset described as the largest and most diverse to date, with 15,003 high-resolution images, 49,745 manual annotations, bilingual (English/Chinese) referring expressions, and support for single-object, multi-object, and non-object scenarios. It also proposes MRSNet, which combines an Intra-scale Feature Interaction Module (IFIM) and a Hierarchical Feature Integration Module (HFIM), and reports experiments on NWPU-Refer against LAVT and RMSIN, claiming state-of-the-art results. The manuscript includes dataset statistics, architecture details, qualitative visualizations, and an ablation study of two IFIM submodules.

Significance. If the dataset claims and benchmark results hold, NWPU-Refer would be a useful community resource: it is manually annotated, includes a larger number of annotations than prior RRSIS datasets, introduces multi-object and non-object referring tasks, and is released with public code and data. The proposed MRSNet is also a reasonable architecture-level contribution with a public implementation. However, the central 'largest' claim is currently contradicted by the paper's own comparison table, and the 'state-of-the-art' claim rests on a very narrow evaluation. The significance of the work is therefore conditional on correcting these issues and strengthening the benchmarking and annotation-quality evidence.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract, Section I, Table I] The claim that NWPU-Refer is 'the largest RRSIS dataset to date' is not supported by the paper's own Table I, which lists RRSIS-D with 17,402 images versus 15,003 images for NWPU-Refer. If 'largest' is intended to refer to the number of annotations (49,745 versus 17,402), this criterion should be stated explicitly in both the abstract and Section I, and Table I should report annotation counts for RRSIS-D so that the comparison is verifiable. As written, a reader checking the primary contribution against the paper's own table cannot reproduce the 'largest' assertion.
  2. [Section IV-C, Table II] The 'state-of-the-art' claim is supported only by comparisons with two prior methods, LAVT and RMSIN, evaluated exclusively on the proposed NWPU-Refer dataset. The paper does not evaluate on existing RRSIS benchmarks such as RefSegRS or RRSIS-D, does not report error bars or significance tests, and does not compare with more recent referring-segmentation methods. This is insufficient to establish state-of-the-art performance; at minimum, the authors should add cross-dataset evaluation and a broader set of baselines, or restate the claim as 'superior to LAVT and RMSIN on NWPU-Refer'.
  3. [Section II-C] The dataset is intended to serve as ground truth for a benchmark, but the manuscript provides no quantitative evidence of annotation reliability. Section II-C states that 'All annotations are manually performed without auxiliary tools' and that a senior annotator reviews the data, yet no inter-annotator agreement metric, quality-control statistics, or re-annotation study is reported. Without such evidence, systematic annotation errors could propagate into every benchmark score, so the paper should report at least a standard agreement measure (e.g., pixel-level IoU or mask-level agreement on a subset) to support the claim of 'high precision and reliability'.
  4. [Section IV-F, Table III] The ablation study does not validate the two headline contributions of the paper. Table III only varies PSR and CSR inside IFIM; there is no ablation for the Hierarchical Feature Integration Module (HFIM), the Cross Model Align Submodule, or the frequency-domain components. Since the abstract and Section III present HFIM as a key innovation, the absence of an HFIM ablation leaves the contribution of that module unsubstantiated and weakens the attribution of the reported gains to the proposed architecture.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Section IV-C] There is a typographical error in the abstract: 'conducte' should be 'conducted', and the phrase in Section IV-C 'the capability of model' should be 'the capability of the model'.
  2. [Table I caption] The caption reads 'THE COMPREHENSION WITH THE EXISTING DATASETS'; this should be 'COMPARISON WITH THE EXISTING DATASETS'.
  3. [Section II-D] The claims of '30+ countries' and 'five continents' are asserted without a geographic distribution table, a list of source regions, or a country-level breakdown; adding such information would make the diversity claim verifiable.
  4. [Section IV-B] The experimental settings omit several details needed for reproducibility, including the number of training epochs, batch size, input resolution, and the exact BERT and Swin-Transformer configurations; also, 'NVIDIA GTX 6000' appears to be a typo for a different GPU model.
  5. [Figures 4–7] The architecture figures contain mixed English/Chinese labels, repeated blocks, and overlapping arrows, making them difficult to read; the authors should redraw these figures with consistent English-only notation and clearer module boundaries.
  6. [Section IV-E] The Chinese referring segmentation results are presented only as qualitative visualizations, while Section IV-B states that 'only the English language is used for training'; the paper should clarify whether the model was trained on bilingual data and, if not, why Chinese visualizations are shown.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: MRSNet is benchmarked against external baselines (LAVT, RMSIN) and the dataset is independently constructed; the internal 'largest' inconsistency is a factual error, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing derivation chain is not circular. MRSNet's reported performance (Table II) is obtained by training on the NWPU-Refer benchmark and comparing against LAVT and RMSIN, which are external methods with published architectures; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no result is defined in terms of the quantity it claims to predict. The ablation study (Table III) compares configurations of the proposed modules on the same held-out test split, which isolates contributions empirically rather than presupposing them. Self-citations ([12], [13], [41], [42]) appear only as related-work and backbone-style references and are not used to justify the central claims of dataset scale or network effectiveness. The 'largest' claim is contradicted by the paper's own Table I, which lists RRSIS-D with 17,402 images versus 15,003 for NWPU-Refer; however, this is an internal factual/consistency problem about the definition of 'largest' (image count versus annotation count), not a circular reduction. Similarly, the absence of inter-annotator agreement statistics and the unsupported '30+ countries / five continents' diversity claim are data-quality and evidence concerns, not circularity. No equation is shown to reduce to its own input, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. Accordingly, the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central empirical claims rest on dataset quality and fair evaluation. Since no inter-annotator agreement, split statistics, or baseline code are provided, the assumptions are unverified. Model hyperparameters are standard and not part of a theoretical derivation.

free parameters (3)
  • Initial learning rate = 6e-4
    Chosen by hand for AdamW training; affects convergence and final metrics.
  • Evaluation thresholds P@0.7, P@0.8, P@0.9 = 0.7, 0.8, 0.9
    Standard precision thresholds for referring segmentation, selected as evaluation criteria.
  • Dataset split ratio = 7:1:2
    Chosen split by region; affects benchmark difficulty.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Manual annotations are accurate and consistent
    The dataset quality depends on four annotators with no inter-annotator agreement reported (Section II-C).
  • domain assumption Baseline comparisons are fair and correctly implemented
    No code or checkpoints for LAVT and RMSIN are provided; the paper claims fair comparison without details (Section IV-C).
  • domain assumption The dataset is representative of RRSIS tasks and free of geographic or class bias that would distort benchmark rankings
    Images are collected from five continents, but no statistics on split balance or bias are provided (Section II-D).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Large-Scale Referring Remote Sensing Image Segmentation Dataset and Benchmark." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HLG37QWY

@misc{pith2026250603583,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Large-Scale Referring Remote Sensing Image Segmentation Dataset and Benchmark},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HLG37QWY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.03583}
}
read the original abstract

Referring Remote Sensing Image Segmentation is a complex and challenging task that integrates the paradigms of computer vision and natural language processing. Existing datasets for RRSIS suffer from critical limitations in resolution, scene diversity, and category coverage, which hinders the generalization and real-world applicability of refer segmentation models. To facilitate the development of this field, we introduce NWPU-Refer, the largest and most diverse RRSIS dataset to date, comprising 15,003 high-resolution images (1024-2048px) spanning 30+ countries with 49,745 annotated targets supporting single-object, multi-object, and non-object segmentation scenarios. Additionally, we propose the Multi-scale Referring Segmentation Network (MRSNet), a novel framework tailored for the unique demands of RRSIS. MRSNet introduces two key innovations: (1) an Intra-scale Feature Interaction Module (IFIM) that captures fine-grained details within each encoder stage, and (2) a Hierarchical Feature Interaction Module (HFIM) to enable seamless cross-scale feature fusion, preserving spatial integrity while enhancing discriminative power. Extensive experiments conducte on the proposed NWPU-Refer dataset demonstrate that MRSNet achieves state-of-the-art performance across multiple evaluation metrics, validating its effectiveness. The dataset and code are publicly available at https://github.com/CVer-Yang/NWPU-Refer.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.03583 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of refer segmentation datasets for four target categories: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Illustration of data distribution characteristics. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Example visualizations of the NWPU-Refer. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The overview of the proposed MRSNet. generating comprehensive feature representations with robust intra-scale perception. This is particularly important for han￾dling objects of different scales in remote sensing images. Spatial-Spectral Refinement: Given the input fea…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The structure of the proposed context-aware spatial relation modeling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The structure of the proposed Cross Model Align Submodule. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Qualitative comparisons between MRSNet, LAVT and RMSIN. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The visualization results of MRSNet for chinese refe segmentation. The left section showcases predictions for Single objects, the middle section [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Stronger fewer & superior: Harnessing vision foundation models for domain generalized semantic segmentation,

    Z. Wei, L. Chen, Y . Jin, X. Ma, T. Liu, P. Ling, B. Wang, H. Chen, and J. Zheng, “Stronger fewer & superior: Harnessing vision foundation models for domain generalized semantic segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2024, pp. 28 619–28 630

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Sed: A simple encoder- decoder for open-vocabulary semantic segmentation,

    B. Xie, J. Cao, J. Xie, F. S. Khan, and Y . Pang, “Sed: A simple encoder- decoder for open-vocabulary semantic segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2024, pp. 3426–3436

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Lscenellm: Enhancing large 3d scene understanding using adaptive visual preferences,

    H. Zhi, P. Chen, J. Li, S. Ma, X. Sun, T. Xiang, Y . Lei, M. Tan, and C. Gan, “Lscenellm: Enhancing large 3d scene understanding using adaptive visual preferences,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01292, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Retrieval-augmented recommender system: Enhancing recommender systems with large language models,

    D. Di Palma, “Retrieval-augmented recommender system: Enhancing recommender systems with large language models,” inProceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, 2023, pp. 1369– 1373

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Scaleformer: revisiting the transformer-based backbones from a scale-wise perspective for medical image segmentation,

    H. Huang, S. Xie, L. Lin, Y . Iwamoto, X. Han, Y .-W. Chen, and R. Tong, “Scaleformer: revisiting the transformer-based backbones from a scale-wise perspective for medical image segmentation,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.14552, 2022

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Gres: Generalized referring expression segmentation,

    C. Liu, H. Ding, and X. Jiang, “Gres: Generalized referring expression segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2023, pp. 23 592–23 601

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Prompt-driven referring image segmentation with instance contrasting,

    C. Shang, Z. Song, H. Qiu, L. Wang, F. Meng, and H. Li, “Prompt-driven referring image segmentation with instance contrasting,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion, 2024, pp. 4124–4134

    2024

  8. [8]

    Mask grounding for referring image segmentation,

    Y . X. Chng, H. Zheng, Y . Han, X. Qiu, and G. Huang, “Mask grounding for referring image segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 26 573–26 583. 9

    work page 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Mevis: A large- scale benchmark for video segmentation with motion expressions,

    H. Ding, C. Liu, S. He, X. Jiang, and C. C. Loy, “Mevis: A large- scale benchmark for video segmentation with motion expressions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 2023, pp. 2694–2703

    2023

  2. [10]

    Clevrtex: A texture-rich benchmark for unsupervised multi-object segmentation,

    L. Karazija, I. Laina, and C. Rupprecht, “Clevrtex: A texture-rich benchmark for unsupervised multi-object segmentation,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2111.10265, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Scanrefer: 3d object local- ization in rgb-d scans using natural language,

    D. Z. Chen, A. X. Chang, and M. Nießner, “Scanrefer: 3d object local- ization in rgb-d scans using natural language,” inEuropean conference on computer vision. Springer, 2020, pp. 202–221

    2020

  4. [12]

    Multi-branch mutual-guiding learning for infrared small target detection,

    Q. Li, W. Zhang, W. Lu, and Q. Wang, “Multi-branch mutual-guiding learning for infrared small target detection,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2025

    2025

  5. [13]

    Edge-guided per- ceptual network for infrared small target detection,

    Q. Li, M. Zhang, Z. Yang, Y . Yuan, and Q. Wang, “Edge-guided per- ceptual network for infrared small target detection,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Rrsis: Referring remote sensing image segmentation,

    Z. Yuan, L. Mou, Y . Hua, and X. X. Zhu, “Rrsis: Referring remote sensing image segmentation,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    Rotated multi-scale interaction network for referring remote sensing image seg- mentation,

    S. Liu, Y . Ma, X. Zhang, H. Wang, J. Ji, X. Sun, and R. Ji, “Rotated multi-scale interaction network for referring remote sensing image seg- mentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 26 658–26 668

    2024

  8. [16]

    Segment anything,

    A. Kirillov, E. Mintun, N. Ravi, H. Mao, C. Rolland, L. Gustafson, T. Xiao, S. Whitehead, A. C. Berg, W.-Y . Loet al., “Segment anything,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2023, pp. 4015–4026

    2023

  9. [17]

    Transformer-based visual segmentation: A survey,

    X. Li, H. Ding, H. Yuan, W. Zhang, J. Pang, G. Cheng, K. Chen, Z. Liu, and C. C. Loy, “Transformer-based visual segmentation: A survey,”IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2024

    2024

  10. [18]

    Hierarchical open-vocabulary universal image segmentation,

    X. Wang, S. Li, K. Kallidromitis, Y . Kato, K. Kozuka, and T. Darrell, “Hierarchical open-vocabulary universal image segmentation,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 36, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Referitgame: Referring to objects in photographs of natural scenes,

    S. Kazemzadeh, V . Ordonez, M. Matten, and T. Berg, “Referitgame: Referring to objects in photographs of natural scenes,” inProceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), 2014, pp. 787–798

    2014

  12. [20]

    Microsoft coco: Common objects in context,

    T.-Y . Lin, M. Maire, S. Belongie, J. Hays, P. Perona, D. Ramanan, P. Doll ´ar, and C. L. Zitnick, “Microsoft coco: Common objects in context,” inComputer Vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European Conference, Zurich, Switzerland, September 6-12, 2014, Proceedings, Part V 13. Springer, 2...

    2014

  13. [21]

    Rsvg: Exploring data and models for visual grounding on remote sensing data,

    Y . Zhan, Z. Xiong, and Y . Yuan, “Rsvg: Exploring data and models for visual grounding on remote sensing data,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, vol. 61, pp. 1–13, 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    Refer- ring image segmentation via cross-modal progressive comprehension,

    S. Huang, T. Hui, S. Liu, G. Li, Y . Wei, J. Han, L. Liu, and B. Li, “Refer- ring image segmentation via cross-modal progressive comprehension,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2020, pp. 10 488–10 497

    2020

  15. [23]

    Bi-directional relationship inferring network for referring image segmentation,

    Z. Hu, G. Feng, J. Sun, L. Zhang, and H. Lu, “Bi-directional relationship inferring network for referring image segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2020, pp. 4424–4433

    2020

  16. [24]

    Cross-modal pro- gressive comprehension for referring segmentation,

    S. Liu, T. Hui, S. Huang, Y . Wei, B. Li, and G. Li, “Cross-modal pro- gressive comprehension for referring segmentation,”IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 4761– 4775, 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Exploring fine-grained image-text alignment for referring remote sensing image segmentation,

    S. Lei, X. Xiao, T. Zhang, H.-C. Li, Z. Shi, and Q. Zhu, “Exploring fine-grained image-text alignment for referring remote sensing image segmentation,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Finding nemo: Negative-mined mosaic augmentation for referring image segmentation,

    S. Ha, C. Kim, D. Kim, J. Lee, S. Lee, and J. Lee, “Finding nemo: Negative-mined mosaic augmentation for referring image segmentation,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2024, pp. 121– 137

    2024

  19. [27]

    Remam- ber: Referring image segmentation with mamba twister,

    Y . Yang, C. Ma, J. Yao, Z. Zhong, Y . Zhang, and Y . Wang, “Remam- ber: Referring image segmentation with mamba twister,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2024, pp. 108–126

    2024

  20. [28]

    Iterprime: Zero-shot referring image segmentation with iterative grad-cam refinement and primary word emphasis,

    Y . Wang, J. Ni, Y . Liu, C. Yuan, and Y . Tang, “Iterprime: Zero-shot referring image segmentation with iterative grad-cam refinement and primary word emphasis,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.00936, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Densely connected parameter-efficient tuning for referring image segmentation,

    J. Huang, Z. Xu, T. Liu, Y . Liu, H. Han, K. Yuan, and X. Li, “Densely connected parameter-efficient tuning for referring image segmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.08580, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Vision-aware text features in referring image seg- mentation: From object understanding to context understanding,

    H. Nguyen-Truong, E.-R. Nguyen, T.-A. Vu, M.-T. Tran, B.-S. Hua, and S.-K. Yeung, “Vision-aware text features in referring image seg- mentation: From object understanding to context understanding,” in 2025 IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV). I...

    2025

  23. [31]

    Adaptive selection based referring image seg- mentation,

    P. Yue, J. Lin, S. Zhang, J. Hu, Y . Lu, H. Niu, H. Ding, Y . Zhang, G. Jiang, L. Caoet al., “Adaptive selection based referring image seg- mentation,” inProceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Multimedia, 2024, pp. 1101–1110

    2024

  24. [32]

    Lisa: Reasoning segmentation via large language model,

    X. Lai, Z. Tian, Y . Chen, Y . Li, Y . Yuan, S. Liu, and J. Jia, “Lisa: Reasoning segmentation via large language model,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 9579–9589

    2024

  25. [33]

    Pixellm: Pixel reasoning with large multimodal model,

    Z. Ren, Z. Huang, Y . Wei, Y . Zhao, D. Fu, J. Feng, and X. Jin, “Pixellm: Pixel reasoning with large multimodal model,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2024, pp. 26 374–26 383

    2024

  26. [34]

    Visa: Reasoning video object segmentation via large lan- guage models,

    C. Yan, H. Wang, S. Yan, X. Jiang, Y . Hu, G. Kang, W. Xie, and E. Gavves, “Visa: Reasoning video object segmentation via large lan- guage models,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 2025, pp. 98–115

    2025

  27. [35]

    Referring image segmentation via recurrent refinement networks,

    R. Li, K. Li, Y .-C. Kuo, M. Shu, X. Qi, X. Shen, and J. Jia, “Referring image segmentation via recurrent refinement networks,” inProceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2018, pp. 5745–5753

    2018

  28. [36]

    Locate then segment: A strong pipeline for referring image segmentation,

    Y . Jing, T. Kong, W. Wang, L. Wang, L. Li, and T. Tan, “Locate then segment: A strong pipeline for referring image segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 9858–9867

    2021

  29. [37]

    Referring image segmentation using text supervision,

    F. Liu, Y . Liu, Y . Kong, K. Xu, L. Zhang, B. Yin, G. Hancke, and R. Lau, “Referring image segmentation using text supervision,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2023, pp. 22 124–22 134

    2023

  30. [38]

    Cross-modal self-attention network for referring image segmentation,

    L. Ye, M. Rochan, Z. Liu, and Y . Wang, “Cross-modal self-attention network for referring image segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2019, pp. 10 502–10 511

    2019

  31. [39]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, “Attention is all you need,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017

    2017

  32. [40]

    Lavt: Language-aware vision transformer for referring image segmentation,

    Z. Yang, J. Wang, Y . Tang, K. Chen, H. Zhao, and P. H. Torr, “Lavt: Language-aware vision transformer for referring image segmentation,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2022, pp. 18 155–18 165

    2022

  33. [41]

    C 2 net: Road extraction via context perception and cross spatial-scale feature interaction,

    Z. Yang, W. Zhang, Q. Li, W. Ni, J. Wu, and Q. Wang, “C 2 net: Road extraction via context perception and cross spatial-scale feature interaction,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  34. [42]

    Hcnet: Hierarchical feature aggregation and cross-modal feature alignment for remote sensing image captioning,

    Z. Yang, Q. Li, Y . Yuan, and Q. Wang, “Hcnet: Hierarchical feature aggregation and cross-modal feature alignment for remote sensing image captioning,”IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024

    2024

  35. [43]

    Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows,

    Z. Liu, Y . Lin, Y . Cao, H. Hu, Y . Wei, Z. Zhang, S. Lin, and B. Guo, “Swin transformer: Hierarchical vision transformer using shifted windows,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 2021, pp. 10 012–10 022

    2021

  36. [44]

    Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding,

    J. Devlin, “Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding,”arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.04805, 2018

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.