Polygon: Symbolic Reasoning for SQL using Conflict-Driven Under-Approximation Search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a novel symbolic reasoning engine for SQL which can efficiently generate an input I for n queries P 1 , ⋯, P n , such that their outputs on I satisfy a given property (expressed in SMT). This is useful in different contexts, such as disproving equivalence of two SQL queries and disambiguating a set of queries. Our first idea is to reason about an under-approximation of each P i –that is, a subset of P i ’s input-output behaviors. While it makes our approach both semantics-aware and lightweight, this idea alone is incomplete (as a fixed under-approximation might miss some behaviors of interest). Therefore, our second idea is to perform search over an expressive family of under-approximations (which collectively cover all program behaviors of interest), thereby making our approach complete. We have implemented these ideas in a tool, Polygon , and evaluated it on over 30,000 benchmarks across two tasks (namely, SQL equivalence refutation and query disambiguation). Our evaluation results show that Polygon significantly outperforms all prior techniques.
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".