Reliable Text-to-SQL with Adaptive Abstention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language interfaces for databases, particularly in text-to-SQL conversion. However, current approaches often generate unreliable outputs when faced with ambiguity or insufficient context. We present Reliable Text-to-SQL (RTS), a novel framework that enhances query generation reliability by incorporating abstention and human-in-the-loop mechanisms. RTS focuses on the critical schema linking phase, which aims to identify the key database elements needed for generating SQL queries. It autonomously detects potential errors during the answer generation process and responds by either abstaining or engaging in user interaction. A vital component of RTS is the Branching Point Prediction (BPP) which utilizes statistical conformal techniques on the hidden layers of the LLM model for schema linking, providing probabilistic guarantees on schema linking accuracy. We validate our approach through comprehensive experiments on the BIRD benchmark, demonstrating significant improvements in robustness and reliability. Our findings highlight the potential of combining transparent-box LLMs with human-in-the-loop processes to create more robust natural language interfaces for databases. For the BIRD benchmark, our approach achieves near-perfect schema linking accuracy, autonomously involving a human when needed. Combined with query generation, we demonstrate that near-perfect schema linking and a small query generation model can almost match SOTA accuracy achieved with a model orders of magnitude larger than the one we use.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".