the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
BRIGHT: A globally distributed multimodal building damage assessment dataset with very-high-resolution for all-weather disaster response
Abstract. Disaster events occur around the world and cause significant damage to human life and property. Earth observation (EO) data enables rapid and comprehensive building damage assessment, an essential capability crucial in the aftermath of a disaster to reduce human casualties and inform disaster relief efforts. Recent research focuses on developing artificial intelligence (AI) models to accurately map unseen disaster events, mostly using optical EO data. These solutions based on optical data are limited to clear skies and daylight hours, preventing a prompt response to disasters. Integrating multimodal EO data, particularly combining optical and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery, makes it possible to provide all-weather, day-and-night disaster responses. Despite this potential, the lack of suitable benchmark datasets has constrained the development of robust multimodal AI models. In this paper, we present a Building damage assessment dataset using veRy-hIGH-resoluTion optical and SAR imagery (BRIGHT) to support AI-based all-weather disaster response. To the best of our knowledge, BRIGHT is the first open-access, globally distributed, event-diverse multimodal dataset specifically curated to support AI-based disaster response. It covers five types of natural disasters and two types of human-made disasters across 14 regions worldwide, focusing on developing countries where external assistance is most needed. The dataset's optical and SAR images with spatial resolutions between 0.3 and 1 meters provide detailed representations of individual buildings, making it ideal for precise damage assessment. We train seven advanced AI models on BRIGHT to validate transferability and robustness. Beyond that, it also serves as a challenging benchmark for a variety of tasks in real-world disaster scenarios, including unsupervised domain adaptation, semi-supervised learning, unsupervised multimodal change detection, and unsupervised multimodal image matching. The experimental results serve as baselines to inspire future research and model development. The dataset (Chen et al., 2025), along with the code and pretrained models, is available at https://github.com/ChenHongruixuan/BRIGHT and will be updated as and when a new disaster data is available. BRIGHT also serves as the official dataset for the 2025 IEEE GRSS Data Fusion Contest Track II. We hope that this effort will promote the development of AI-driven methods in support of people in disaster-affected areas.
- Preprint
(32165 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 16 Aug 2025)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2025-269', Anonymous Referee #1, 11 Jul 2025
reply
This paper introduces BRIGHT, a novel and timely benchmark dataset for building damage assessment using multimodal high-resolution optical and SAR imagery. Covering 14 globally distributed disaster events, BRIGHT provides pixel-level damage annotations for over 384,000 buildings. The dataset is designed to facilitate AI-based disaster response research, particularly in challenging all-weather conditions. The authors also benchmark a suite of machine learning and deep learning models on multiple tasks. The authors provided detailed documents and descriptions, making the data, related source code, and pretrained weights of models easy to understand and use.
In summary, this is quite interesting and solid work. I’d like to recommend the acceptance of this work since it represents an important contribution to Earth observation and disaster response communities. Yet before acceptance, several clarifications and refinements are suggested.
- The manuscript would benefit from deeper exploration of what the models learn from multimodal fusion. Specifically, what roles do optical images play in multimodal building damage assessment? Is it beyond just building footprint localization? On the other words, are the features extracted from optical imagery actively compared with SAR representations? Some discussion (e.g., based on CAMs in Fig. 7) is provided but can be more explicitly elaborated.
- The manuscript makes extensive evaluation of supervised and unsupervised change detection models, but the conceptual and methodological relationship between building damage assessment and generic change detection remains unclear, which is largely implied rather than discussed. An explicit and clearer explanation would be great for readers who lack of related background.
- Since UMCD methods underperform, consider including a random guessing baseline for reference. This would contextualize the difficulty of BRIGHT and help readers understand the performance floor under UMCD setup.
- While Table 1 offers a comprehensive comparison of datasets, several datasets seem relevant and should be included to enhance its completeness, like CRASAR-U-DROIDs [arXiv:2407.17673] and Noto-Earthquake building damage dataset [10.5194/essd-2024-363].
- The paper describes careful multimodal alignment but omits the software used, e.g., ENVI, ArcGIS, or QGIS. Please provide related details.
- Appendix G includes important new experimental setups and evaluation methods for UMCD. However, too much content is composed together now. It is not easy for people to grasp information. Adding section subtitles could improve readability.
- 8: Please specify in the figure or caption that the values represent average ± standard deviation across models.
- 10: Add a note in the caption to clarify that each dot corresponds to performance on a single test event under cross-event transfer.
- Typo in Table 7: “Object-based major voting” should be corrected to “Object-based majority voting”.
- Clarify the meaning of “–” symbols in Table 11. Do they indicate missing data or inapplicability? This should be stated explicitly.
- “ML” should be defined on its first use and consistently used thereafter instead of alternating with [machine learning].
- Standardize currency formatting (e.g., USD vs. US$).
- Define abbreviations such as IGN and GSI when first mentioned as data providers.
- The format of references should be standardized. Some of these entries use abbreviations for journals, while others have full titles.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2025-269-RC1
Data sets
BRIGHT Hongruixuan Chen, Jian Song, Olivier Dietrich, Clifford Broni-Bediako, Weihao Xuan, Junjue Wang, Xinlei Shao, Yimin Wei, Junshi Xia, Cuiling Lan, Konrad Schindler, Naoto Yokoya https://zenodo.org/records/14619797
Model code and software
BRIGHT Hongruixuan Chen, Jian Song, Olivier Dietrich, Clifford Broni-Bediako, Weihao Xuan, Junjue Wang, Xinlei Shao, Yimin Wei, Junshi Xia, Cuiling Lan, Konrad Schindler, Naoto Yokoya https://github.com/ChenHongruixuan/BRIGHT
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
310 | 119 | 21 | 450 | 11 | 12 |
- HTML: 310
- PDF: 119
- XML: 21
- Total: 450
- BibTeX: 11
- EndNote: 12
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1
Cited
2 citations as recorded by crossref.
- Deep Learning-Based Detection and Assessment of Road Damage Caused by Disaster with Satellite Imagery J. Cha et al. 10.3390/app15147669
- DamageScope: An Integrated Pipeline for Building Damage Segmentation, Geospatial Mapping, and Interactive Web-Based Visualization S. Al Shafian et al. 10.3390/rs17132267