Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

HFEPX · Eval paper review

Beam Search, Self-Consistency, and the Limits of Inference-Time Scaling for Grammar-Constrained Text-to-SQL in Small Language Models

Ty Chermsirivatana, John MacCormick

Published

Aug 26, 2026

Citations

0

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

5/100 (Low)

Extraction confidence

45% (Low)

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Rater population

Not reported

Signals refreshed

Aug 26, 2026

Should you rely on this paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A benchmark-and-metrics comparison anchor.

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Human feedback signal
Not explicit
Not explicit in abstract metadata
Evaluation signal
Detected
Eval setup described
Usefulness for eval research
5/100
Adjacent candidate

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Abstract

One common trade-off in the use of large language models involves reducing the size of the model while increasing the amount of computation at inference time, for example by using a wider beam search. In this paper, we examine the constrained case of this "model size vs. inference compute" trade-off, in which the model outputs are constrained by a strict grammar at inference time. Our results demonstrate that the constrained trade-off behaves differently from the unconstrained trade-off. We investigate the task of converting a prose query into an equivalent SQL query (text-to-SQL). Performance is evaluated on the Spider text-to-SQL benchmark, using the Qwen2.5-Instruct model family ranging in size from 0.5B to 7B parameters, all at 4-bit precision. We experiment with two approaches to varying inference compute: (i) beam search with a variable number of beams; and (ii) sample+vote, i.e., sampling several constrained outputs and then voting on their execution results, where the number of samples is varied. On the 1034-example development set, we find that: (a) both beam search and sample+vote improve accuracy, especially on smaller model sizes; (b) the "model size vs.\ inference compute" trade-off is not advantageous in this experiment, because moving to a larger model size typically results in higher accuracy than increasing inference compute on the same model size; (c) beam search outperforms sample+vote at a matched inference budget. This latter result is of particular interest since it contrasts with the findings of the unconstrained trade-off.

What we could verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"One common trade-off in the use of large language models involves reducing the size of the model while increasing the amount of computation at inference time, for example by using a wider beam search."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"One common trade-off in the use of large language models involves reducing the size of the model while increasing the amount of computation at inference time, for example by using a wider beam search."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"One common trade-off in the use of large language models involves reducing the size of the model while increasing the amount of computation at inference time, for example by using a wider beam search."

Benchmarks / Datasets

partial

Spider

Useful for quick benchmark comparison.

"Performance is evaluated on the Spider text-to-SQL benchmark, using the Qwen2.5-Instruct model family ranging in size from 0.5B to 7B parameters, all at 4-bit precision."

Reported Metrics

partial

Accuracy, Precision

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Performance is evaluated on the Spider text-to-SQL benchmark, using the Qwen2.5-Instruct model family ranging in size from 0.5B to 7B parameters, all at 4-bit precision."

Benchmarks and datasets

Spider

Reported metrics

accuracyprecision
Human feedback details
Uses human feedback
No
Feedback types
None
Rater population
Not reported
Expertise required
General
Evaluation details
Evaluation modes
Automatic Metrics
Agentic eval
None
Quality controls
Not reported
Evidence quality
Low
Use this page as
Background context only

Research brief

Metadata summary

One common trade-off in the use of large language models involves reducing the size of the model while increasing the amount of computation at inference time, for example by using a wider beam search.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key takeaways

  • One common trade-off in the use of large language models involves reducing the size of the model while increasing the amount of computation at inference time, for example by using a wider beam search.
  • In this paper, we examine the constrained case of this "model size vs.
  • inference compute" trade-off, in which the model outputs are constrained by a strict grammar at inference time.

Researcher actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended queries

Contribution summary

  • Performance is evaluated on the Spider text-to-SQL benchmark, using the Qwen2.5-Instruct model family ranging in size from 0.5B to 7B parameters, all at 4-bit precision.
  • On the 1034-example development set, we find that: (a) both beam search and sample+vote improve accuracy, especially on smaller model sizes; (b) the "model size vs.\ inference compute" trade-off is not advantageous in this experiment,…

Why it matters for eval

  • Performance is evaluated on the Spider text-to-SQL benchmark, using the Qwen2.5-Instruct model family ranging in size from 0.5B to 7B parameters, all at 4-bit precision.

Researcher checklist

  • Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    Detected: Spider

  • Metric reporting is present

    Detected: accuracy, precision