Direction-aware multi-branch attention and Gaussian label assignment for remote sensing aggregative object detection

Abstract

ABSTRACT A large number of objects of different scales appear aggregative distribution in remote sensing images, which brings two challenges to remote sensing object detection. The first challenge arises from the presence of objects with large scale differences within the same scene, which complicates the detector’s ability to balance the detection performance between large and small objects. The second challenge is that the distribution of dense objects on remote sensing images with complex backgrounds can reduce the feature representation capability of the network, leading to false detections and missed detections of objects. To address the two challenges present in remote sensing object detection, we propose a new object detection network DA-GLANet (Direction-Aware Multi-Branch Attention and Gaussian Label Assignment Balance Net). For the first challenge, we designed a multi-scale feature fusion module to fully utilize semantic information at different scales, thereby improving the detection accuracy of multi-scale objects. Subsequently, to tackle the second challenge, we proposed a multi-branch attention module with direction-aware capabilities. This module can enhance the network’s feature representation of objects of interest by generating attention maps that are both direction-aware and position-sensitive. In addition, we propose a label assignment strategy based on Gaussian distribution to address the imbalance of positive and negative labels caused by the complexity of remote sensing images. These methods work synergistically to improve aggregative object detection accuracy. We have conducted extensive experiments on the DOTA dataset, Levir dataset, and WHU buildings change detection dataset to demonstrate the superiority of our method. On the DOTA dataset, our method improves mAP by 0.4%, 0.3%, and 0.2% compared to the top three methods. On the Levir dataset, our method improves mAP by 2.5%, 2.2%, and 1.6% compared to the top three methods.