Papers › In the Search for Optimal Multi-view Learning Models for Crop Classification with...
In the Search for Optimal Multi-view Learning Models for Crop Classification with Global Remote Sensing Data
Francisco Mena, Diego Arenas, Andreas Dengel
Studying and analyzing cropland is a difficult task due to its dynamic and heterogeneous growth behavior. Usually, diverse data sources can be collected for its estimation. Although deep learning models have proven to excel in the crop classification task, they face substantial challenges when dealing with multiple inputs, named Multi-View Learning (MVL). The methods used in the MVL scenario can be structured based on the encoder architecture, the fusion strategy, and the optimization technique. The literature has primarily focused on using specific encoder architectures for local regions, lacking a deeper exploration of other components in the MVL methodology. In contrast, we investigate the simultaneous selection of the fusion strategy and encoder architecture, assessing global-scale cropland and crop-type classifications. We use a range of five fusion strategies (Input, Feature, Decision, Ensemble, Hybrid) and five temporal encoders (LSTM, GRU, TempCNN, TAE, L-TAE) as possible configurations in the MVL method. We use the CropHarvest dataset for validation, which provides optical, radar, weather time series, and topographic information as input data. We found that in scenarios with a limited number of labeled samples, a unique configuration is insufficient for all the cases. Instead, a specialized combination should be meticulously sought, including an encoder and fusion strategy. To streamline this search process, we suggest identifying the optimal encoder architecture tailored for a particular fusion strategy, and then determining the most suitable fusion strategy for the classification task. We provide a methodological framework for researchers exploring crop classification through an MVL methodology.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Brazil | Feature fusion with LSTM | Average Accuracy | 0.975 | #1 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Brazil | Feature fusion with LSTM | F1 Macro | 0.979 | #1 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Brazil | Hybrid fusion with LSTM | Average Accuracy | 0.974 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Brazil | Hybrid fusion with LSTM | F1 Macro | 0.978 | #2 of 3 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Kenya | Radar TS with TempCNN | Average Accuracy | 0.676 | #4 of 5 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Kenya | Radar TS with TempCNN | F1 Macro | 0.684 | #4 of 5 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Kenya | Input Fusion with TAE | Average Accuracy | 0.673 | #5 of 5 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Kenya | Input Fusion with TAE | F1 Macro | 0.672 | #5 of 5 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Togo | Ensemble aggregation with GRU | Average Accuracy | 0.842 | #1 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Togo | Ensemble aggregation with GRU | F1 Macro | 0.820 | #1 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Togo | Decision fusion with GRU | Average Accuracy | 0.825 | #3 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Crop Classification | CropHarvest - Togo | Decision fusion with GRU | F1 Macro | 0.7952 | #3 of 4 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections