mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Human-Level Text-to-SQL via Reinforcement Learning on Verified Data, Without Pipeline Engineering

arXiv 2603.20004 ↗First posted 20 Mar 2026cs.DB cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Translating natural language questions to SQL queries (Text-to-SQL) is a long-standing problem in database research. Recent efforts have focused on improving accuracy by building increasingly complex multi-stage large LLM pipelines, layering task decomposition, schema linking, and model-based query selection on top of an LLM. Despite this growing complexity, a substantial gap (>10%) between such systems and human experts persists on benchmarks, suggesting that pipeline engineering alone has hit a ceiling. We show that human-level Text-to-SQL performance is achievable by fine-tuning an LLM using RLVR on clean data, without pipeline components. In this paper, we identified the dominant bottleneck for RLVR on Text-to-SQL: existing training data contains pervasive annotation errors that mislead optimization. To address this, we developed a multi-round, expert-driven verification pipeline and used it to curate BIRD-Platinum, a dataset of 2.5k verified instances sampled from BIRD Train, with errors corrected in 61% of instances. We show that fine-tuning Qwen3-235B on BIRD-Platinum yields consistent improvements (11-16%) over BIRD Train on Arcwise-Plat (an expert-verified version of BIRD) and Spider2, outperforming SOTA open-source systems by 0.6-16%. Furthermore, we diagnosed two failure modes of standard RLVR on Text-to-SQL. We find that (1) result-based rewards have non-trivial false positive rates, and (2) models systematically ignore the external knowledge in BIRD-style problems. To address them, we propose ReViSQL-BIRD, a specialized reward shaping method that combines result-based rewards with SQL equivalence verification and leverages process rewards for incentivizing external-knowledge use. We fine-tuned Kimi-K2.6 with ReViSQL-BIRD. On Arcwise-Plat, ReViSQL-BIRD-K2.6 is the first method to achieve human-level accuracy (92.96%), outperforming top five open-source systems by 10-22%.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 103 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Mar 2026.

Builds on

31 of 103 references.

References · 31

  1. 2023Can LLM Already Serve as A Database Interface? A BIg Bench for Large-Scale Database Grounded Text-to-SQLscited by 667
  2. 2025Why Do Multi-Agent LLM Systems Fail?cited by 559
  3. 2023Text-to-SQL Empowered by Large Language Models: A Benchmark Evaluationcited by 378
  4. 2025MiniMax-M1: Scaling Test-Time Compute Efficiently with Lightning Attentioncited by 248
  5. 2024Spider 2.0: Evaluating Language Models on Real-World Enterprise Text-to-SQL Workflowscited by 223
  6. 2024CodeS: Towards Building Open-source Language Models for Text-to-SQLcited by 183
  7. 2024CHESS: Contextual Harnessing for Efficient SQL Synthesiscited by 164
  8. 2023C3: Zero-shot Text-to-SQL with ChatGPTcited by 159
  9. 2024CHASE-SQL: Multi-Path Reasoning and Preference Optimized Candidate Selection in Text-to-SQLcited by 132
  10. 2024The Death of Schema Linking? Text-to-SQL in the Age of Well-Reasoned Language Modelscited by 67
  11. 2025Reasoning-SQL: Reinforcement Learning with SQL Tailored Partial Rewards for Reasoning-Enhanced Text-to-SQLcited by 59
  12. 2025OpenSearch-SQL: Enhancing Text-to-SQL with Dynamic Few-shot and Consistency Alignmentcited by 51
19 more
  1. 2025XiYan-SQL: A Novel Multi-Generator Framework For Text-to-SQLcited by 40
  2. 2025Arctic-Text2SQL-R1: Simple Rewards, Strong Reasoning in Text-to-SQLcited by 38
  3. 2025ReFoRCE: A Text-to-SQL Agent with Self-Refinement, Consensus Enforcement, and Column Explorationcited by 34
  4. 2019A Comparative Survey of Recent Natural Language Interfaces for Databasescited by 33
  5. 2024Understanding the Effects of Noise in Text-to-SQL: An Examination of the BIRD-Bench Benchmarkcited by 33
  6. 2025Alpha-SQL: Zero-Shot Text-to-SQL using Monte Carlo Tree Searchcited by 33
  7. 2023Evaluating Cross-Domain Text-to-SQL Models and Benchmarkscited by 32
  8. 2025NL2SQL-BUGs: A Benchmark for Detecting Semantic Errors in NL2SQL Translationcited by 31
  9. 2025Automatic Metadata Extraction for Text-to-SQLcited by 25
  10. 2025ExCoT: Optimizing Reasoning for Text-to-SQL with Execution Feedbackcited by 23
  11. 2025Agentar-Scale-SQL: Advancing Text-to-SQL through Orchestrated Test-Time Scalingcited by 20
  12. 2025Reliable Text-to-SQL with Adaptive Abstentioncited by 19
  13. 2025SHARE: An SLM-based Hierarchical Action CorREction Assistant for Text-to-SQLcited by 15
  14. 2025Cheaper, Better, Faster, Stronger: Robust Text-to-SQL without Chain-of-Thought or Fine-Tuningcited by 13
  15. 2026Pervasive Annotation Errors Break Text-to-SQL Benchmarks and Leaderboardscited by 12
  16. 2024SiriusBI: A Comprehensive LLM-Powered Solution for Data Analytics in Business Intelligencecited by 11
  17. 2025SLM-SQL: An Exploration of Small Language Models for Text-to-SQLcited by 10
  18. 2024VeriEQL: Bounded Equivalence Verification for Complex SQL Queries with Integrity Constraintscited by 8
  19. 2025SQaLe: A Large Text-to-SQL Corpus Grounded in Real Schemascited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.