# Are These Modules Worth Their Cost? A Paradigm-Level Accuracy-Cost Analysis of In-context Learning Text-to-SQL

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28432 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.28432/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 27 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 28 Aug 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 27 of 27)

- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [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)
- [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)
- [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)
- [Sketch-of-Thought: Efficient LLM Reasoning with Adaptive Cognitive-Inspired Sketching](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.05179/) (2025)
- [MCS-SQL: Leveraging Multiple Prompts and Multiple-Choice Selection For Text-to-SQL Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.07467/) (2024)
- [Exploring Chain-of-Thought Style Prompting for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14215/) (2023)
- [The Death of Schema Linking? Text-to-SQL in the Age of Well-Reasoned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.07702/) (2024)
- [OpenSearch-SQL: Enhancing Text-to-SQL with Dynamic Few-shot and Consistency Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.14913/) (2025)
- [RSL-SQL: Robust Schema Linking in Text-to-SQL Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.00073/) (2024)
- [Knowledge-to-SQL: Enhancing SQL Generation with Data Expert LLM](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11517/) (2024)
- [PURPLE: Making a Large Language Model a Better SQL Writer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.20014/) (2024)
- [Decomposition for Enhancing Attention: Improving LLM-based Text-to-SQL through Workflow Paradigm](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10671/) (2024)
- [LinkAlign: Scalable Schema Linking for Real-World Large-Scale Multi-Database Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.18596/) (2025)
- [DeepEye-SQL: A Software-Engineering-Inspired Text-to-SQL Framework](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.17586/) (2025)
- [PET-SQL: A Prompt-Enhanced Two-Round Refinement of Text-to-SQL with Cross-consistency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.09732/) (2024)
- [Agentar-Scale-SQL: Advancing Text-to-SQL through Orchestrated Test-Time Scaling](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.24403/) (2025)
- [AutoLink: Autonomous Schema Exploration and Expansion for Scalable Schema Linking in Text-to-SQL at Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.17190/) (2025)
- [SHARE: An SLM-based Hierarchical Action CorREction Assistant for Text-to-SQL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00391/) (2025)
- [CATP-LLM: Empowering Large Language Models for Cost-Aware Tool Planning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.16313/) (2024)
- [Cheaper, Better, Faster, Stronger: Robust Text-to-SQL without Chain-of-Thought or Fine-Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.14174/) (2025)
- [SATER: A Self-Aware and Token-Efficient Approach to Routing and Cascading](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.05164/) (2025)
- [Macro Graph of Experts for Billion-Scale Multi-Task Recommendation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.10520/) (2025)
- [ErrorLLM: Modeling SQL Errors for Text-to-SQL Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.03742/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advances in in-context learning (ICL) text-to-SQL have substantially improved execution accuracy on public benchmarks by assembling increasingly elaborate pipelines around the base generator, yet existing studies typically report aggregate end-to-end accuracy, without quantifying the marginal accuracy-cost contribution of individual design choices. Consequently, providing a unified, paradigm-level cost-accuracy quantification remains a critical challenge for understanding and configuring modern text-to-SQL. To address this, we instantiate 17 paradigm-level configurations across five recurring modules of the ICL text-to-SQL pipeline under a single controlled implementation, and attribute each paradigm's marginal contribution and incurred cost across all four backbones spanning diverse capability levels and reasoning styles. Our analysis reveals that execution-feedback refinement is the only paradigm whose benefit holds universally at consistently low cost, while most other modules help only under backbone-dependent conditions. Token accounting shows that input demand is more closely tied to pipeline structure, whereas output demand is more sensitive to backbone generation behavior. Cross-module analysis further shows that stacking improves accuracy on most backbones, although how the gains compose varies with backbone capability. We also find that a fixed budget is often better spent engineering a more elaborate pipeline over a mid-tier backbone than upgrading to a frontier model with a lean pipeline. These findings distill into an actionable, cost-aware tiered guideline that transfers to five additional backbones without per-paradigm search.