Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 328

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 96 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deep learning for change detection in remote sensing: a review

Open access
Bai, Ting, Wang, Le, Yin, Dameng, Sun, Kaimin, Chen, Yepei, Li, Wenzhuo, Li, Deren·2023·Geo-spatial Information Science

Abstract

A large number of publications have incorporated deep learning in the process of remote sensing change detection. In these Deep Learning Change Detection (DLCD) publications, deep learning methods have demonstrated their superiority over conventional change detection methods. However, the theoretical underpinnings of why deep learning improves the performance of change detection remain unresolved. As of today, few in-depth reviews have investigated the mechanisms of DLCD. Without such a review, five critical questions remain unclear. Does DLCD provide improved information representation for change detection? If so, how? How to select an appropriate DLCD method and why? How much does each type of change benefits from DLCD in terms of its performance? What are the major limitations of existing DLCD methods and what are the prospects for DLCD? To address these five questions, we reviewed according to the following strategies. We grouped the DLCD information assemblages into the four unique dimensions of remote sensing: spectral, spatial, temporal, and multi-sensor. For the extraction of information in each dimension, the difference between DLCD and conventional change detection methods was compared. We proposed a taxonomy of existing DLCD methods by dividing them into two distinctive pools: separate and coupled models. Their advantages, limitations, applicability, and performance were thoroughly investigated and explicitly presented. We examined the variations in performance between DLCD and conventional change detection. We depicted two limitations of DLCD, i.e. training sample and hardware and software dilemmas. Based on these analyses, we identified directions for future developments. As a result of our review, we found that DLCD’s advantages over conventional change detection can be attributed to three factors: improved information representation; improved change detection methods; and performance enhancements. DLCD has to surpass the limitations with regard to training samples and computing infrastructure. We envision this review can boost developments of deep learning in change detection applications.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10095020.2022.2085633

Cites

96 of 96 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 96 references

Metadata

Authors
Bai, T., Wang, L., Yin, D., Sun, K., Chen, Y., Li, W., & Li, D.
Venue
Geo-spatial Information Science
Published
2022-07
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
262-288
ISSN
  • 1009-5020 (ISSN-L)
  • 1993-5153
OpenAlex
W4283776488
Cited by
328
References
96
FWCI
24.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Deep learning for change detection in remote sensing: a review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10095020.2022.2085633
The paper
Bai, T., Wang, L., Yin, D., Sun, K., Chen, Y., Li, W., & Li, D. (2023). Deep learning for change detection in remote sensing: a review. Geo-spatial Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2022.2085633

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.