ETM: Modern Insights into Perspective on Text-to-SQL Evaluation in the Age of Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The task of Text-to-SQL enables anyone to retrieve information from SQL databases using natural language. While this task has made substantial progress, the two primary evaluation metrics - Execution Accuracy (EXE) and Exact Set Matching Accuracy (ESM) - suffer from inherent limitations that can misrepresent performance. Specifically, ESM's rigid matching overlooks semantically correct but stylistically different queries, whereas EXE can overestimate correctness by ignoring structural errors that yield correct outputs. These shortcomings become especially problematic when assessing outputs from large language model (LLM)-based approaches without fine-tuning, which vary more in style and structure compared to their fine-tuned counterparts. Thus, we introduce a new metric, Enhanced Tree Matching (ETM), which mitigates these issues by comparing queries using both syntactic and semantic elements. Through evaluating nine LLM-based models, we show that EXE and ESM can produce false positive and negative rates as high as 23.0% and 28.9%, while ETM reduces these rates to 0.3% and 2.7%, respectively. We release our ETM script as open source, offering the community a more robust and reliable approach to evaluating Text-to-SQL.
Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jul 2024.
Builds on
19 of 33 references.
References · 19
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 59,932
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
- 2018Spider: A Large-Scale Human-Labeled Dataset for Complex and Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing and Text-to-SQL Taskcited by 1,120
- 2023Can LLM Already Serve as A Database Interface? A BIg Bench for Large-Scale Database Grounded Text-to-SQLscited by 667
- 2023DIN-SQL: Decomposed In-Context Learning of Text-to-SQL with Self-Correctioncited by 465
- 2021PICARD: Parsing Incrementally for Constrained Auto-Regressive Decoding from Language Modelscited by 402
- 2023Text-to-SQL Empowered by Large Language Models: A Benchmark Evaluationcited by 378
- 2023RESDSQL: Decoupling Schema Linking and Skeleton Parsing for Text-to-SQLcited by 191
- 2024CodeS: Towards Building Open-source Language Models for Text-to-SQLcited by 183
- 2019CoSQL: A Conversational Text-to-SQL Challenge Towards Cross-Domain Natural Language Interfaces to Databasescited by 180
7 more
- 2023C3: Zero-shot Text-to-SQL with ChatGPTcited by 159
- 2020Semantic Evaluation for Text-to-SQL with Distilled Test Suitescited by 123
- 2023Graphix-T5: Mixing Pre-Trained Transformers with Graph-Aware Layers for Text-to-SQL Parsingcited by 93
- 2022RASAT: Integrating Relational Structures into Pretrained Seq2Seq Model for Text-to-SQLcited by 85
- 2024The Dawn of Natural Language to SQL: Are We Fully Ready?cited by 78
- 2023Enhancing Text-to-SQL Translation for Financial System Designcited by 12
- 2024StatBot.Swiss: Bilingual Open Data Exploration in Natural Languagecited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
3 papers.
- 2025Taming SQL Complexity: LLM-Based Equivalence Evaluation for Text-to-SQLcited by 2
- 2026Beyond the Harness: End-to-End Optimization of Context Artifacts for Enterprise Text-to-SQLcited by 0
- 2026Certified Against Which Oracle? Execution Labels Set the Reported Risk of Conformal Abstention for Text-to-SQLcited by 0
- 2026Certified Against Which Oracle? Execution Labels Set the Reported Risk of Conformal Abstention for Text-to-SQL22 Sep 2026
- 2026Beyond the Harness: End-to-End Optimization of Context Artifacts for Enterprise Text-to-SQL24 Aug 2026
- 2025Taming SQL Complexity: LLM-Based Equivalence Evaluation for Text-to-SQL11 Jun 2025