aiqbench analysis
This research addresses the deployment of Text-to-SQL systems in resource-constrained environments by leveraging small, specialized LLMs (1B–8B parameters) rather than scaling to larger models. The authors demonstrate that reliability can be significantly improved through lightweight iterative retry workflows that adapt prompts and models dynamically, trading modest inference costs for higher end-to-end success rates.
Reliable Text-to-SQL in Resource-Constrained Settings with Small LLMs via Iterative Retry Workflows
arXiv:2610.17305v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently improved Text-to-SQL generation, but their computational cost can hinder deployment in resource-constrained settings. This paper evaluates the Text-to-SQL capabilities of small and medium open-source LLMs (1B-8B parameters) under a controlled inference budget, focusing on how model specialization and prompt formulation affect performance. Using the Spider benchmark, we compare multiple prompt representations and assess the accuracy of generated queries. Our results show that SQL-specialized models are consistently more reliable than general-purpose and chat-oriented models at small scales, and that performance can vary substantially depending on the prompt used. To reduce this variability without resorting to larger models, we introduce three lightweight inference workflows that automatically retry with alternative prompts and/or models when failures occur, including an optional syntax-correction step. These workflows significantly improve end-to-end success rates, with a trade-off in additional inference calls. These results demonstrate a practical path to stronger Text-to-SQL performance with small LLMs, by trading modest additional inference cost for higher reliability.
Abstract:Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently improved Text-to-SQL generation, but their computational cost can hinder deployment in resource-constrained settings. This paper evaluates the Text-to-SQL capabilities of small and medium open-source LLMs (1B-8B parameters) under a controlled inference budget, focusing on how model specialization and prompt formulation affect performance. Using the Spider benchmark, we compare multiple prompt representations and assess the accuracy of generated queries. Our results show that SQL-specialized models are consistently more reliable than general-purpose and chat-oriented models at small scales, and that performance can vary substantially depending on the prompt used. To reduce this variability without resorting to larger models, we introduce three lightweight inference workflows that automatically retry with alternative prompts and/or models when failures occur, including an optional syntax-correction step. These workflows significantly improve end-to-end success rates, with a trade-off in additional inference calls. These results demonstrate a practical path to stronger Text-to-SQL performance with small LLMs, by trading modest additional inference cost for higher reliability.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2610.17305 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2610.17305v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.17305 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAC70325.2026.11712531 Focus to learn more DOI(s) linking to related resources
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 264 words
Related coverage
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026
If This Were a Test, How Much Would It Cost?
LessWrong · Jun 16, 2026

Presentation: Designing AI Platforms for Reliability: Tools for Certainty, Agents for Discovery
InfoQ · May 27, 2026

Game Design Creativity evals
LessWrong · Oct 12, 2026