Scaling Laws for Geospatial Foundation Models: A case study on PhilEO Bench
Nikolaos Dionelis, Riccardo Musto, Jente Bosmans, Simone Sarti, Giancarlo Paoletti, Peter Naylor, Valerio Marsocci, S\'ebastien Lef\`evre, Bertrand Le Saux, Nicolas Long\'ep\'e

TL;DR
This study investigates how dataset size, model architecture, and scale influence the performance of geospatial foundation models, providing insights into optimal configurations for Earth Observation tasks.
Contribution
It systematically explores the impact of dataset size, architecture, and scale on GFMs, introducing the FastTOM dataset and benchmarking multiple models on a new comprehensive benchmark.
Findings
CNN models excel in low-shot settings.
ViT-UPerNet performs best on large datasets.
Mamba models show potential efficiency advantages.
Abstract
Foundation Models (FMs) have achieved state-of-the-art performance across domains by leveraging large-scale pretraining. In Earth Observation (EO), the availability of petabyte-scale satellite archives has recently enabled the development of GeoSpatial Foundation Models (GFMs). Yet, fundamental questions remain regarding how dataset size, model architecture, and size interact to determine downstream performance. In this work, we systematically explore this design space by pretraining and fine-tuning models on three dataset scales: PhilEO Globe (0.5TB), FastTOM (2TB, introduced here), and MajorTOM (23TB). We evaluate three architectural families: Geo-Aware U-Net (CNN), ViT-UPerNet (Transformer), and Mamba (State-Space Model); across model sizes ranging from 44M to 300M parameters. All models are benchmarked on the PhilEO Bench, covering: road density and building density regression, and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
