TasksSotADatasetsPapersMethodsSubmitAbout
Papers With Code 2

A community resource for machine learning research: papers, code, benchmarks, and state-of-the-art results.

Explore

Notable BenchmarksAll SotADatasetsPapersMethods

Community

Submit ResultsAbout

Data sourced from the PWC Archive (CC-BY-SA 4.0). Built by the community, for the community.

Papers/RASAT: Integrating Relational Structures into Pretrained S...

RASAT: Integrating Relational Structures into Pretrained Seq2Seq Model for Text-to-SQL

Jiexing Qi, Jingyao Tang, Ziwei He, Xiangpeng Wan, Yu Cheng, Chenghu Zhou, Xinbing Wang, Quanshi Zhang, Zhouhan Lin

2022-05-14Semantic ParsingText-To-SQLDialogue State Tracking
PaperPDFCode(official)

Abstract

Relational structures such as schema linking and schema encoding have been validated as a key component to qualitatively translating natural language into SQL queries. However, introducing these structural relations comes with prices: they often result in a specialized model structure, which largely prohibits using large pretrained models in text-to-SQL. To address this problem, we propose RASAT: a Transformer seq2seq architecture augmented with relation-aware self-attention that could leverage a variety of relational structures while inheriting the pretrained parameters from the T5 model effectively. Our model can incorporate almost all types of existing relations in the literature, and in addition, we propose introducing co-reference relations for the multi-turn scenario. Experimental results on three widely used text-to-SQL datasets, covering both single-turn and multi-turn scenarios, have shown that RASAT could achieve state-of-the-art results across all three benchmarks (75.5% EX on Spider, 52.6% IEX on SParC, and 37.4% IEX on CoSQL).

Results

TaskDatasetMetricValueModel
DialogueCoSQLinteraction match accuracy26.5RASAT+PICARD
DialogueCoSQLquestion match accuracy55.7RASAT+PICARD
Semantic ParsingspiderAccuracy75.5RASAT+PICARD
Semantic ParsingSParCinteraction match accuracy45.2RASAT+PICARD
Semantic ParsingSParCquestion match accuracy67.7RASAT+PICARD
Semantic ParsingSPIDERExact Match Accuracy (in Dev)75.3RASAT+PICARD
Semantic ParsingSPIDERExecution Accuracy (in Dev)80.5RASAT+PICARD
Semantic ParsingSPIDERExact Match Accuracy (in Dev)72.6RASAT
Semantic ParsingSPIDERExecution Accuracy (in Dev)76.6RASAT
Text-To-SQLSParCinteraction match accuracy45.2RASAT+PICARD
Text-To-SQLSParCquestion match accuracy67.7RASAT+PICARD
Text-To-SQLSPIDERExact Match Accuracy (in Dev)75.3RASAT+PICARD
Text-To-SQLSPIDERExecution Accuracy (in Dev)80.5RASAT+PICARD
Text-To-SQLSPIDERExact Match Accuracy (in Dev)72.6RASAT
Text-To-SQLSPIDERExecution Accuracy (in Dev)76.6RASAT

Related Papers

CogniSQL-R1-Zero: Lightweight Reinforced Reasoning for Efficient SQL Generation2025-07-08XiYan-SQL: A Novel Multi-Generator Framework For Text-to-SQL2025-07-07Where, What, Why: Towards Explainable Driver Attention Prediction2025-06-29SWE-SQL: Illuminating LLM Pathways to Solve User SQL Issues in Real-World Applications2025-06-23Schema-R1: A reasoning training approach for schema linking in Text-to-SQL Task2025-06-13Beyond Single-User Dialogue: Assessing Multi-User Dialogue State Tracking Capabilities of Large Language Models2025-06-12Bridging the Gap Between Open-Source and Proprietary LLMs in Table QA2025-06-11LLM-Driven Data Generation and a Novel Soft Metric for Evaluating Text-to-SQL in Aviation MRO2025-06-11