A Deep Learning Method for Field Boundary Delineation From Remote Sensing Imagery With High Boundary Connectivity
Abstract
Accurate delineation of agricultural field boundaries from remote sensing imagery is fundamental for precision agriculture and policy-making. However, existing deep learning methods struggle with this task due to the difficulty of balancing semantic context with fine detail. Their unique imaging features (e.g., intricate linear nature, frequent occlusions) further challenge the detection of continuous boundaries. To address these issues, we propose a High Connectivity and Accuracy Field Boundary Network (HCFNet). HCFNet employs a novel two-stage framework where a lightweight region segmentation task provides explicit semantic constraints to a dedicated boundary delineation task. The boundary task is powered by an enhanced edge network featuring four key innovations: a Linearly Connected Deformable Convolution (LCDConv) to capture fine boundary morphology, a Non-Local Operation (NLO) to resolve local ambiguities using global context, a Continuity Restoration Decoder (CRD) that expands the receptive field and bridge occluded segments, and a Hierarchical Attention Fusion Module (HAFM) for adaptive multi-scale feature fusion. We conducted extensive experiments on diverse datasets, including high-resolution Gaofen-1, Google Earth, UAV imagery, and the global FTW benchmark. HCFNet consistently outperformed state-of-the-art models, achieving superior boundary accuracy (F1 score) and significantly improved connectivity. Our results demonstrate that HCFNet provides a robust and efficient solution for field boundary delineation, with its specialized modules proving particularly valuable in data-scarce scenarios common in practical applications. The code for HCFNet is available at (https://github.com/BNU-zhu/HCFNet).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Wang, X., Girshick, R., Gupta, A., & He, K. (2018) · 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00813 · Cited by 11,596 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Zhu, Y., Pan, Y., Hu, T., & Liu, Y.
- Affiliations
- Beijing Normal University (CN)
- Hangzhou Normal University (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing
- Published
- 2025
- Volume
- 63
- Pages
- 1-23
- ISSN
- 0196-2892 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0644
- OpenAlex
- W4415821247
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3
- FWCI
- 1.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Key Research and Development Program of China (2023YFB3906200, 2023YFB3906201)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (42192580, 42192581)
- Open Fund of State Key Laboratory of Remote Sensing Science and Beijing Engineering Research Center for Global Land Remote Sensing Products (OF202401)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Remote Sensing in Agriculture
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Smart Agriculture and AI
- Keywords
- two-stage segmentation, deformable convolution, non-local operations, occlusion handling, multi-scale feature fusion, precision agriculture
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