Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Optimizing Small Language Models for NL2SQL via Chain-of-Thought Fine-Tuning

Anshul Solanki, Sanchit Latawa, Koushik Chakraborty, Navneet Kamboj · Mar 24, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this paper page

Coverage: Stale

Use this page to decide whether the paper is strong enough to influence an eval design. It summarizes the abstract plus available structured metadata. If the signal is thin, use it as background context and compare it against stronger hub pages before making protocol choices.

Best use

Background context only

Metadata: Stale

Trust level

Provisional

Signals: Stale

What still needs checking

Structured extraction is still processing; current fields are metadata-first.

Signal confidence unavailable

Abstract

Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises. Although Large Language Models (LLMs) like Gemini 2.5 and other LLMs have demonstrated impressive zero-shot capabilities, their high inference costs limit deployment at scale. This paper explores the efficacy of fine-tuning both large and small language models on NL2SQL tasks. Our research reveals a counter-intuitive scaling phenomenon. Fine-tuning large models (Gemini 2.5 Flash/Lite) on standard datasets yields negligible returns, often leading to overfitting on complex queries. Conversely, small models (Qwen) show significant gains. Fine-tuning improved the small model baseline from 36% to 45%, and further enriching the dataset with explicit Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning surged accuracy to 54.5%(Fig 2). While this is still lower than the accuracy of large models like Gemini 2.5 , it does serve the business goal of significant cost reduction, latency in inference time and also meeting the business critical performance accuracy threshold.This paper demonstrates that transferring reasoning patterns enables compute-efficient smaller models to approach production-grade performance.

Use caution before copying this protocol

Use this page for context, then validate protocol choices against stronger HFEPX references before implementation decisions.

  • Structured extraction is still processing; current fields are metadata-first.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

Signal extraction is still processing. This page currently shows metadata-first guidance until structured protocol fields are ready.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A provisional background reference while structured extraction finishes.

Main weakness

Structured extraction is still processing; current fields are metadata-first.

Trust level

Provisional

Eval-Fit Score

Unavailable

Eval-fit score is unavailable until extraction completes.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

Provisional (processing)

Extraction confidence: Provisional

What This Page Found In The Paper

Each field below shows whether the signal looked explicit, partial, or missing in the available metadata. Use this to judge what is safe to trust directly and what still needs full-paper validation.

Human Feedback Types

provisional

None explicit

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

Evidence snippet: Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.

Evaluation Modes

provisional

Automatic metrics

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Includes extracted eval setup.

Evidence snippet: Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.

Quality Controls

provisional

Not reported

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

No explicit QC controls found.

Evidence snippet: Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.

Benchmarks / Datasets

provisional

Not extracted

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

No benchmark anchors detected.

Evidence snippet: Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.

Reported Metrics

provisional

Accuracy

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

Evidence snippet: Fine-tuning improved the small model baseline from 36% to 45%, and further enriching the dataset with explicit Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning surged accuracy to 54.5%(Fig 2).

Rater Population

provisional

Unknown

Confidence: Provisional Best-effort inference

Rater source not explicitly reported.

Evidence snippet: Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.

Human Data Lens

This page is using abstract-level cues only right now. Treat the signals below as provisional.

  • Potential human-data signal: No explicit human-data keywords detected.
  • Potential benchmark anchors: No benchmark names detected in abstract.
  • Abstract highlights: 3 key sentence(s) extracted below.

Evaluation Lens

Evaluation fields are inferred from the abstract only.

  • Potential evaluation modes: Automatic metrics
  • Potential metric signals: Accuracy
  • Confidence: Provisional (metadata-only fallback).

Research Brief

Metadata summary

Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.

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

Key Takeaways

  • Translating Natural Language to SQL (NL2SQL) remains a critical bottleneck for democratization of data in enterprises.
  • Although Large Language Models (LLMs) like Gemini 2.5 and other LLMs have demonstrated impressive zero-shot capabilities, their high inference costs limit deployment at scale.
  • This paper explores the efficacy of fine-tuning both large and small language models on NL2SQL tasks.

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

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

No related papers found for this item yet.

Get Started

Join the #1 Platform for AI Training Talent

Where top AI builders and expert AI Trainers connect to build the future of AI.
Self-Service
Post a Job
Post your project and get a shortlist of qualified AI Trainers and Data Labelers. Hire and manage your team in the tools you already use.
Managed Service
For Large Projects
Done-for-You
We recruit, onboard, and manage a dedicated team inside your tools. End-to-end operations for large or complex projects.
For Freelancers
Join as an AI Trainer
Find AI training and data labeling projects across platforms, all in one place. One profile, one application process, more opportunities.