aiqbench analysis
This research isolates the specific mechanisms driving recovery in agentic Text-to-Cypher pipelines, demonstrating that simple failure detection and retry routing outperform sophisticated feedback loops or parallel sampling. The study provides empirical evidence that raw database error strings are sufficient for refinement without sacrificing quality, while also quantifying the limitations of current n-gram-based evaluation metrics against human judgment.
What Drives Recovery in Agentic Text-to-Cypher? LAST-CQ: An LLM Agent Self-Refinement Framework
arXiv:2609.12746v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic pipelines for structured-query generation are rapidly expanding, but it is unclear which part of the loop produces the gain. We use LAST-CQ -- a five-agent, training-free, execution-grounded Text-to-Cypher framework -- as an instrumented testbed, running three counterfactuals over 2,471 live-database queries and six backbones spanning three vendor scale tiers. Removing correction is worth between 3.1% aggregate execution-BLEU against the single-pass system and 12.3% against a no-refinement counterfactual (up to 80.7% for the weakest backbone). Replacing schema-grounded, LLM-synthesised feedback with raw database error strings costs almost nothing (20.9% vs. 19.9% naive exact match; <0.2% end-to-end; equivalent within $\pm 0.075$ set-F1 by two one-sided tests). Spending the same call budget on parallel sampling degrades quality by 10-11%. What works is detecting failure and routing it to a retry, not the feedback sophistication or number of samples. LAST-CQ itself recovers 91.7% of queries that fail under single-pass generation, while a query that succeeds first time still costs exactly one LLM call. We also show that n-gram overlap on serialised results is not a bound in either direction: it over-scores against set equivalence on 65.9% of results while under-scoring against judged semantics. Finally, we calibrate our LLM judge against blind human labels and find it optimistic by 9 points.
Title:What Drives Recovery in Agentic Text-to-Cypher? LAST-CQ: An LLM Agent Self-Refinement Framework
Abstract:Agentic pipelines for structured-query generation are rapidly expanding, but it is unclear which part of the loop produces the gain. We use LAST-CQ -- a five-agent, training-free, execution-grounded Text-to-Cypher framework -- as an instrumented testbed, running three counterfactuals over 2,471 live-database queries and six backbones spanning three vendor scale tiers. Removing correction is worth between 3.1% aggregate execution-BLEU against the single-pass system and 12.3% against a no-refinement counterfactual (up to 80.7% for the weakest backbone). Replacing schema-grounded, LLM-synthesised feedback with raw database error strings costs almost nothing (20.9% vs. 19.9% naive exact match; <0.2% end-to-end; equivalent within $\pm 0.075$ set-F1 by two one-sided tests). Spending the same call budget on parallel sampling degrades quality by 10-11%. What works is detecting failure and routing it to a retry, not the feedback sophistication or number of samples. LAST-CQ itself recovers 91.7% of queries that fail under single-pass generation, while a query that succeeds first time still costs exactly one LLM call. We also show that n-gram overlap on serialised results is not a bound in either direction: it over-scores against set equivalence on 65.9% of results while under-scoring against judged semantics. Finally, we calibrate our LLM judge against blind human labels and find it optimistic by 9 points.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Multiagent Systems (cs.MA); Software Engineering (cs.SE)
arXiv:2609.12746 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.12746v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.12746 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 325 words
Related coverage

Build a Physical AI model factory with NVIDIA Cosmos 3 on SageMaker HyperPod
AWS · Sep 4, 2026

[AINews] not much happened today
Latent Space · Sep 10, 2026

Frontier post-training recipe review with Finbarr Timbers
Interconnects · Jun 16, 2026
Performance Profiling on AMD GPUs – Part 5: Profiling-Driven Kernel Optimization with an AI Code-Assist Tool
AMD · Jul 16, 2026