# GenEdit: Compounding Operators and Continuous Improvement to Tackle Text-to-SQL in the Enterprise

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21602 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.21602/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 23 of its 31 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 23 of 23)

- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasoners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2205.11916/) (2022)
- [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)
- [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)
- [Seq2SQL: Generating Structured Queries from Natural Language using Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.00103/) (2017)
- [Plan-and-Solve Prompting: Improving Zero-Shot Chain-of-Thought Reasoning by Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.04091/) (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)
- [CHESS: Contextual Harnessing for Efficient SQL Synthesis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.16755/) (2024)
- [C3: Zero-shot Text-to-SQL with ChatGPT](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.07306/) (2023)
- [MAC-SQL: A Multi-Agent Collaborative Framework for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.11242/) (2023)
- [SQLNet: Generating Structured Queries From Natural Language Without Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.04436/) (2017)
- [Next-Generation Database Interfaces: A Survey of LLM-based Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.08426/) (2024)
- [MCS-SQL: Leveraging Multiple Prompts and Multiple-Choice Selection For Text-to-SQL Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.07467/) (2024)
- [The Death of Schema Linking? Text-to-SQL in the Age of Well-Reasoned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.07702/) (2024)
- [ACT-SQL: In-Context Learning for Text-to-SQL with Automatically-Generated Chain-of-Thought](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.17342/) (2023)
- [Robust Text-to-SQL Generation with Execution-Guided Decoding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1807.03100/) (2018)
- [Before Generation, Align it! A Novel and Effective Strategy for Mitigating Hallucinations in Text-to-SQL Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.15307/) (2024)
- [BEAVER: An Enterprise Benchmark for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.02038/) (2024)
- [Interactive Text-to-SQL Generation via Editable Step-by-Step Explanations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.07372/) (2023)
- [Revisiting Prompt Engineering via Declarative Crowdsourcing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03854/) (2023)
- [End-to-end Text-to-SQL Generation within an Analytics Insight Engine](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12104/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [BenchPress: A Human-in-the-Loop Annotation System for Rapid Text-to-SQL Benchmark Curation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.13853/) (2025)
- [Fine-Grained Table Retrieval Through the Lens of Complex Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.07146/) (2026)
- [SQLMorph: Query Mutation and Fine-Grained Metrics for Text-to-SQL Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.08950/) (2026)
- [Exploring the Semantic Gap in Agentic Data Systems: A Formative Study of Operationalization Failures in Analytical Workflows](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.00828/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advancements in Text-to-SQL, driven by large language models, are democratizing data access. Despite these advancements, enterprise deployments remain challenging due to the need to capture business-specific knowledge, handle complex queries, and meet expectations of continuous improvements. To address these issues, we designed and implemented GenEdit: our Text-to-SQL generation system that improves with user feedback. GenEdit builds and maintains a company-specific knowledge set, employs a pipeline of operators decomposing SQL generation, and uses feedback to update its knowledge set to improve future SQL generations. We describe GenEdit's architecture made of two core modules: (i) decomposed SQL generation; and (ii) knowledge set edits based on user feedback. For generation, GenEdit leverages compounding operators to improve knowledge retrieval and to create a plan as chain-of-thought steps that guides generation. GenEdit first retrieves relevant examples in an initial retrieval stage where original SQL queries are decomposed into sub-statements, clauses or sub-queries. It then also retrieves instructions and schema elements. Using the retrieved contextual information, GenEdit then generates step-by-step plan in natural language on how to produce the query. Finally, GenEdit uses the plan to generate SQL, minimizing the need for model reasoning, which enhances complex SQL generation. If necessary, GenEdit regenerates the query based on syntactic and semantic errors. The knowledge set edits are recommended through an interactive copilot, allowing users to iterate on their feedback and to regenerate SQL queries as needed. Each generation uses staged edits which update the generation prompt. Once the feedback is submitted, it gets merged after passing regression testing and obtaining an approval, improving future generations.