Cited by 0Automated Road and Building ExtractionRemote-Sensing Image Classification3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications

Developing a Transfer Learning-Based Deep Learning Model for Visible Cadastral Boundary Delineation in Nepal

Open access
Shrestha, Helina, Koeva, Mila, Grift, Jeroen, Persello, Claudio·2026·Remote Sensing

Abstract

This study investigates the potential of transfer learning-based deep learning models to complement ground-based cadastral data acquisition in Nepal. Multiple transfer learning strategies were evaluated to extract visible cadastral boundaries. The evaluation was conducted using 30 cm-resolution Pleiades Neo 4 satellite imagery acquired over a heterogeneous study area comprising predominantly agricultural land and sparsely built, semi-urban settlements. A pre-trained U-Net model was used as a classifier, feature extractor, and fine-tuning target, and its performance was compared with a U-Net trained from scratch and a U-Net with a ResNet-101 encoder (ResNet-101 U-Net) pre-trained on ImageNet. Among the experiments, the fine-tuned U-Net model pretrained on an agricultural dataset achieved the best performance, attaining an F1 score of 0.56 when evaluated against digitized visible land boundaries. The predicted boundaries were further compared with the official cadastral boundaries, applying multiple buffer distances to quantify spatial accuracy. At a buffer distance of 2 m, the highest F1 score obtained was 44.81%, reflecting both spatial discrepancies in the 1600-hectare study area’s official cadastral datasets and the challenges associated with delineating legally defined visually indistinct boundaries. The study highlights the potential of transfer learning-based models for visible cadastral boundary delineation tasks, while acknowledging their limitations in delineating invisible legal cadastral boundaries, as corroborated by stakeholder feedback and field observations.

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 · 10.3390/rs18193283

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.

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 20

Authors
Shrestha, H., Koeva, M., Grift, J., & Persello, C.
Affiliations
  • Government of Nepal (NP)
  • International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation (NL)
Corresponding author
Koeva, Mila
Venue
Remote Sensing
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2026-09-23
Volume
18
Issue
19
Pages
3283
ISSN
2072-4292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7214112857
Cited by
0
References
20
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Remote Sensing (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Ocean Engineering › Automated Road and Building Extraction
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Remote-Sensing Image Classification
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › 3D Modeling in Geospatial Applications
Keywords
transfer learning, U-Net, satellite image classification, fine-tuning, Nepal

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