Deep learning has exhibited potential in land use and land cover (LULC) classification applications. However, the effectiveness of deep learning remains constrained by the availability and quality of annotated training data. The persistent scarcity of labeled samples and spatial heterogeneity of remote sensing imagery hinder the robustness and generalization of trained models. Meta-learning, commonly referred to as “learning to learn”, is a paradigm that trains models over a distribution of tasks to acquire transferable knowledge, enabling rapid adaptation to new tasks with only a few labeled samples. This cross-task learning capability makes meta-learning a promising solution to data scarcity and spatial heterogeneity in the remote sensing context. This paper provides a systematic review of meta-learning applications in LULC classification, identifying a total of 70 relevant studies between 2018 and 2025. Three mainstream meta-learning paradigms (memory-augmented, optimization-based, and metric-based) are reviewed, and the applications are analyzed across four core challenges in LULC remote sensing: label scarcity, cross-region and cross-domain distribution shifts, temporal dynamics modeling, and multimodal data integration. The review reveals that optimization-based and metric-based methods dominate current research, with MAML and its variants being the most widely adopted due to the model-agnostic property, while memory-augmented methods remain underexplored. A consistent finding is that meta-learning outperforms conventional pre-training followed by fine-tuning under significant domain shifts across multiple data modalities. Current limitations, including computational overhead, episodic training constraints, and the lack of standardized evaluation protocols, are discussed. Future directions in cross-domain generalization, integration with foundation models, novel architectures, and standardized benchmarks are identified.
He et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: