Evaluating NL2SQL via SQL2NL
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Robust evaluation in the presence of linguistic variation is key to understanding the generalization capabilities of Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) models, yet existing benchmarks rarely address this factor in a systematic or controlled manner. We propose a novel schema-aligned paraphrasing framework that leverages SQL-to-NL (SQL2NL) to automatically generate semantically equivalent, lexically diverse queries while maintaining alignment with the original schema and intent. This enables the first targeted evaluation of NL2SQL robustness to linguistic variation in isolation-distinct from prior work that primarily investigates ambiguity or schema perturbations. Our analysis reveals that state-of-the-art models are far more brittle than standard benchmarks suggest. For example, LLaMa3.3-70B exhibits a 10.23% drop in execution accuracy (from 77.11% to 66.9%) on paraphrased Spider queries, while LLaMa3.1-8B suffers an even larger drop of nearly 20% (from 62.9% to 42.5%). Smaller models (e.g., GPT-4o mini) are disproportionately affected. We also find that robustness degradation varies significantly with query complexity, dataset, and domain -- highlighting the need for evaluation frameworks that explicitly measure linguistic generalization to ensure reliable performance in real-world settings.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2025.
Builds on
17 of 26 references.
References · 17
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2018Spider: A Large-Scale Human-Labeled Dataset for Complex and Cross-Domain Semantic Parsing and Text-to-SQL Taskcited by 1,139
- 2023Can LLM Already Serve as A Database Interface? A BIg Bench for Large-Scale Database Grounded Text-to-SQLscited by 688
- 2019RAT-SQL: Relation-Aware Schema Encoding and Linking for Text-to-SQL Parserscited by 424
- 2024Spider 2.0: Evaluating Language Models on Real-World Enterprise Text-to-SQL Workflowscited by 232
- 2019Towards Complex Text-to-SQL in Cross-Domain Database with Intermediate Representationcited by 210
- 2024CodeS: Towards Building Open-source Language Models for Text-to-SQLcited by 187
- 2020GraPPa: Grammar-Augmented Pre-Training for Table Semantic Parsingcited by 171
- 2021LGESQL: Line Graph Enhanced Text-to-SQL Model with Mixed Local and Non-Local Relationscited by 119
- 2021Towards Robustness of Text-to-SQL Models against Synonym Substitutioncited by 110
- 2019Representing Schema Structure with Graph Neural Networks for Text-to-SQL Parsingcited by 74
- 2023Dr.Spider: A Diagnostic Evaluation Benchmark towards Text-to-SQL Robustnesscited by 53
5 more
- 2024BEAVER: An Enterprise Benchmark for Text-to-SQLcited by 42
- 2021ShadowGNN: Graph Projection Neural Network for Text-to-SQL Parsercited by 35
- 2023Benchmarking and Improving Text-to-SQL Generation under Ambiguitycited by 34
- 2018SQL-to-Text Generation with Graph-to-Sequence Modelcited by 31
- 2024Is Table Retrieval a Solved Problem? Exploring Join-Aware Multi-Table Retrievalcited by 27
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.