# Enhancing LLM Fine-tuning for Text-to-SQLs by SQL Quality Measurement

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.01869 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.01869/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 18 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 2 Oct 2024.

## Builds on (most cited first, 18 of 18)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Can LLM Already Serve as A Database Interface? A BIg Bench for Large-Scale Database Grounded Text-to-SQLs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.03111/) (2023)
- [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)
- [CodeS: Towards Building Open-source Language Models for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.16347/) (2024)
- [Bridging Textual and Tabular Data for Cross-Domain Text-to-SQL Semantic Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2012.12627/) (2020)
- [Graphix-T5: Mixing Pre-Trained Transformers with Graph-Aware Layers for Text-to-SQL Parsing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.07507/) (2023)
- [RASAT: Integrating Relational Structures into Pretrained Seq2Seq Model for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.06983/) (2022)
- [ACT-SQL: In-Context Learning for Text-to-SQL with Automatically-Generated Chain-of-Thought](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17342/) (2023)
- [RYANSQL: Recursively Applying Sketch-based Slot Fillings for Complex Text-to-SQL in Cross-Domain Databases](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.03125/) (2020)
- [A Survey on Text-to-SQL Parsing: Concepts, Methods, and Future Directions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.13629/) (2022)
- [DTS-SQL: Decomposed Text-to-SQL with Small Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.01117/) (2024)
- [SADGA: Structure-Aware Dual Graph Aggregation Network for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.00653/) (2021)
- [S2SQL: Injecting Syntax to Question-Schema Interaction Graph Encoder for Text-to-SQL Parsers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.06958/) (2022)
- [SQLBench: A Comprehensive Evaluation for Text-to-SQL Capabilities of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.02951/) (2024)
- [Deep Learning Driven Natural Languages Text to SQL Query Conversion: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2208.04415/) (2022)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [SAFE-SQL: Self-Augmented In-Context Learning with Fine-grained Example Selection for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.11438/) (2025)
- [Chatting with Logs: An exploratory study on Finetuning LLMs for LogQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.03612/) (2024)
- [Integrating Reasoning and Generalization in Text-to-SQL via Self-Enhanced Fine-Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.15598/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Text-to-SQLs enables non-expert users to effortlessly retrieve desired information from relational databases using natural language queries. While recent advancements, particularly with Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT and T5, have shown impressive performance on large-scale benchmarks such as BIRD, current state-of-the-art (SOTA) LLM-based Text-to-SQLs models often require significant efforts to develop auxiliary tools like SQL classifiers to achieve high performance. This paper proposed a novel approach that only needs SQL Quality Measurement to enhance LLMs-based Text-to-SQLs performance. It establishes a SQL quality evaluation mechanism to assess the generated SQL queries against predefined criteria and actual database responses. This feedback loop enables continuous learning and refinement of model outputs based on both syntactic correctness and semantic accuracy. The proposed method undergoes comprehensive validation on the BIRD benchmark, assessing Execution Accuracy (EX) and Valid Efficiency Score (VES) across various Text-to-SQLs difficulty levels. Experimental results reveal competitive performance in both EX and VES compared to SOTA models like GPT4 and T5.