“…The approach is analyzed in comparison to six OOD methods, i.e., RetinaNet-O [30], Faster R-CNN [43], S 2 ANet [31], RoI Transformer [14], AOPG [67], and Oriented R-CNN [15], on both RSI datasets. Furthermore, comparisons are made with nine other OOD methods, such as DRN [33], LO-Det-GGHL [75], CenterMap-Net [47], DPGN [51], Oriented RepPoints [5], YOLOv2-O [28], Rep-YOLO [79], RSI-YOLOv5 [80], and YOLOv8-O [81] on the DOTA dataset. The assessment is broadened with an additional four OOD methods, including Double-Heads [40], Gliding Vertex [68], QPDet [53], and DODet [66] on DIOR-R. As shown in Table 3, the DOTA dataset includes 15 different object categories, denoted as PL, BD, BR, GTF, SV, LV, SH, TC, BC, ST, SBF, RA, HA, SP, and HC.…”