# A comprehensive evaluation of ChatGPT's zero-shot Text-to-SQL capability

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.13547 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.13547/

## Key facts

- Cited by 119 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 26 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Mar 2023.

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.10683/) (2019)
- [Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1706.03741/) (2017)
- [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)
- [RAT-SQL: Relation-Aware Schema Encoding and Linking for Text-to-SQL Parsers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.04942/) (2019)
- [PICARD: Parsing Incrementally for Constrained Auto-Regressive Decoding from Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.05093/) (2021)
- [Mathematical Capabilities of ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.13867/) (2023)
- [ChatIE: Zero-Shot Information Extraction via Chatting with ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.10205/) (2023)
- [Binding Language Models in Symbolic Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.02875/) (2022)
- [CoSQL: A Conversational Text-to-SQL Challenge Towards Cross-Domain Natural Language Interfaces to Databases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.05378/) (2019)
- [SParC: Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing in Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.02285/) (2019)
- [Semantic Evaluation for Text-to-SQL with Distilled Test Suites](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.02840/) (2020)
- [Structure-Grounded Pretraining for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.12773/) (2020)
- [LGESQL: Line Graph Enhanced Text-to-SQL Model with Mixed Local and Non-Local Relations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01093/) (2021)
- [Towards Robustness of Text-to-SQL Models against Synonym Substitution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.01065/) (2021)
- [Evaluating the Text-to-SQL Capabilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.00498/) (2022)
- [Exploring Underexplored Limitations of Cross-Domain Text-to-SQL Generalization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.05157/) (2021)
- [RASAT: Integrating Relational Structures into Pretrained Seq2Seq Model for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.06983/) (2022)
- [A Pilot Study for Chinese SQL Semantic Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1909.13293/) (2019)
- [Proton: Probing Schema Linking Information from Pre-trained Language Models for Text-to-SQL Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.14017/) (2022)
- [Towards Robustness of Text-to-SQL Models Against Natural and Realistic Adversarial Table Perturbation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09994/) (2022)
- [Semantic Enhanced Text-to-SQL Parsing via Iteratively Learning Schema Linking Graph](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.03903/) (2022)
- [STAR: SQL Guided Pre-Training for Context-dependent Text-to-SQL Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.11888/) (2022)
- [Measuring and Improving Compositional Generalization in Text-to-SQL via Component Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.02054/) (2022)
- [CQR-SQL: Conversational Question Reformulation Enhanced Context-Dependent Text-to-SQL Parsers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.07686/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 30 of 119)

- [DIN-SQL: Decomposed In-Context Learning of Text-to-SQL with Self-Correction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.11015/) (2023)
- [Text-to-SQL Empowered by Large Language Models: A Benchmark Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.15363/) (2023)
- [StructGPT: A General Framework for Large Language Model to Reason over Structured Data](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.09645/) (2023)
- [Leak, Cheat, Repeat: Data Contamination and Evaluation Malpractices in Closed-Source LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03927/) (2024)
- [CodeS: Towards Building Open-source Language Models for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.16347/) (2024)
- [C3: Zero-shot Text-to-SQL with ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07306/) (2023)
- [A Systematic Study and Comprehensive Evaluation of ChatGPT on Benchmark Datasets](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18486/) (2023)
- [Next-Generation Database Interfaces: A Survey of LLM-based Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.08426/) (2024)
- [A Semantic Invariant Robust Watermark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06356/) (2023)
- [Is ChatGPT a Highly Fluent Grammatical Error Correction System? A Comprehensive Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.01746/) (2023)
- [LLMs for Knowledge Graph Construction and Reasoning: Recent Capabilities and Future Opportunities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13168/) (2023)
- [BLADE: Benchmarking Language Model Agents for Data-Driven Science](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.09667/) (2024)
- [Data-Copilot: Bridging Billions of Data and Humans with Autonomous Workflow](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.07209/) (2023)
- [Exploring Chain-of-Thought Style Prompting for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14215/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Employing Large Language Models for Text-to-SQL Tasks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.15186/) (2024)
- [An Unforgeable Publicly Verifiable Watermark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.16230/) (2023)
- [Unifying the Perspectives of NLP and Software Engineering: A Survey on Language Models for Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.07989/) (2023)
- [How to Prompt LLMs for Text-to-SQL: A Study in Zero-shot, Single-domain, and Cross-domain Settings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.11853/) (2023)
- [Skill-Based Few-Shot Selection for In-Context Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14210/) (2023)
- [Enhancing Few-shot Text-to-SQL Capabilities of Large Language Models: A Study on Prompt Design Strategies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.12586/) (2023)
- [SQL-PaLM: Improved Large Language Model Adaptation for Text-to-SQL (extended)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.00739/) (2023)
- [Exploring the Potential of Large Language Models in Computational Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.09022/) (2023)
- [Knowledge-to-SQL: Enhancing SQL Generation with Data Expert LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11517/) (2024)
- [Benchmarking and Improving Text-to-SQL Generation under Ambiguity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13659/) (2023)
- [PURPLE: Making a Large Language Model a Better SQL Writer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20014/) (2024)
- [Multi-Task Instruction Tuning of LLaMa for Specific Scenarios: A Preliminary Study on Writing Assistance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13225/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Cross-Domain Text-to-SQL Models and Benchmarks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.18538/) (2023)
- [SQLBench: A Comprehensive Evaluation for Text-to-SQL Capabilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02951/) (2024)
- [Decomposition for Enhancing Attention: Improving LLM-based Text-to-SQL through Workflow Paradigm](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10671/) (2024)
- [LinkAlign: Scalable Schema Linking for Real-World Large-Scale Multi-Database Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.18596/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

This paper presents the first comprehensive analysis of ChatGPT's Text-to-SQL ability. Given the recent emergence of large-scale conversational language model ChatGPT and its impressive capabilities in both conversational abilities and code generation, we sought to evaluate its Text-to-SQL performance. We conducted experiments on 12 benchmark datasets with different languages, settings, or scenarios, and the results demonstrate that ChatGPT has strong text-to-SQL abilities. Although there is still a gap from the current state-of-the-art (SOTA) model performance, considering that the experiment was conducted in a zero-shot scenario, ChatGPT's performance is still impressive. Notably, in the ADVETA (RPL) scenario, the zero-shot ChatGPT even outperforms the SOTA model that requires fine-tuning on the Spider dataset by 4.1%, demonstrating its potential for use in practical applications. To support further research in related fields, we have made the data generated by ChatGPT publicly available at https://github.com/THU-BPM/chatgpt-sql.