# Prefix-to-SQL: Text-to-SQL Generation from Incomplete User Questions

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.13066 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.13066/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 24 of its 71 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 15 Sep 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 24 of 24)

- [Attention Is All You Need](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03762/) (2017)
- [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10683/) (2019)
- [RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.11692/) (2019)
- [Spider: A Large-Scale Human-Labeled Dataset for Complex and Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing and Text-to-SQL Task](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.08887/) (2018)
- [Seq2SQL: Generating Structured Queries from Natural Language using Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.00103/) (2017)
- [RAT-SQL: Relation-Aware Schema Encoding and Linking for Text-to-SQL Parsers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.04942/) (2019)
- [OpenNMT: Open-source Toolkit for Neural Machine Translation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.03815/) (2017)
- [Towards Complex Text-to-SQL in Cross-Domain Database with Intermediate Representation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.08205/) (2019)
- [GraPPa: Grammar-Augmented Pre-Training for Table Semantic Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.13845/) (2020)
- [Compositional Generalization and Natural Language Variation: Can a Semantic Parsing Approach Handle Both?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.12725/) (2020)
- [Improving Text-to-SQL Evaluation Methodology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1806.09029/) (2018)
- [LGESQL: Line Graph Enhanced Text-to-SQL Model with Mixed Local and Non-Local Relations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01093/) (2021)
- [Coarse-to-Fine Decoding for Neural Semantic Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.04793/) (2018)
- [Learning a Neural Semantic Parser from User Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.08760/) (2017)
- [SmBoP: Semi-autoregressive Bottom-up Semantic Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.12412/) (2020)
- [TRANX: A Transition-based Neural Abstract Syntax Parser for Semantic Parsing and Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.02720/) (2018)
- [Representing Schema Structure with Graph Neural Networks for Text-to-SQL Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1905.06241/) (2019)
- [A Hierarchical Recurrent Encoder-Decoder For Generative Context-Aware Query Suggestion](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1507.02221/) (2015)
- [Learning Contextual Representations for Semantic Parsing with Generation-Augmented Pre-Training](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.10309/) (2020)
- [Text-to-SQL in the Wild: A Naturally-Occurring Dataset Based on Stack Exchange Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.05006/) (2021)
- [Model-based Interactive Semantic Parsing: A Unified Framework and A Text-to-SQL Case Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.05389/) (2019)
- [Semantic Parsing with Dual Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.05343/) (2019)
- [Relation Aware Semi-autoregressive Semantic Parsing for NL2SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.00804/) (2021)
- [GP: Context-free Grammar Pre-training for Text-to-SQL Parsers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.09901/) (2021)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Execution-Based Evaluation for Open-Domain Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10481/) (2022)
- [Recent Advances in Text-to-SQL: A Survey of What We Have and What We Expect](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.10099/) (2022)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Existing text-to-SQL research only considers complete questions as the input, but lay-users might strive to formulate a complete question. To build a smarter natural language interface to database systems (NLIDB) that also processes incomplete questions, we propose a new task, prefix-to-SQL which takes question prefix from users as the input and predicts the intended SQL. We construct a new benchmark called PAGSAS that contains 124K user question prefixes and the intended SQL for 5 sub-tasks Advising, GeoQuery, Scholar, ATIS, and Spider. Additionally, we propose a new metric SAVE to measure how much effort can be saved by users. Experimental results show that PAGSAS is challenging even for strong baseline models such as T5. As we observe the difficulty of prefix-to-SQL is related to the number of omitted tokens, we incorporate curriculum learning of feeding examples with an increasing number of omitted tokens. This improves scores on various sub-tasks by as much as 9% recall scores on sub-task GeoQuery in PAGSAS.