VTS-LLM: Domain-Adaptive LLM Agent for Enhancing Awareness in Vessel Traffic Services through Natural Language

Liangbin Zhao; Ming Deng; Sijin Sun; Xiuju Fu

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 24 references

VTS-LLM: Domain-Adaptive LLM Agent for Enhancing Awareness in Vessel Traffic Services through Natural Language

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that an LLM agent adapted to vessel traffic services can translate operators' natural-language queries into SQL with 77.80% accuracy on a new benchmark, outperforming general and SQL-focused models, and that query style…

desk verdict The VTS-LLM paper brings a genuinely new domain benchmark and a sensible agent architecture, but its headline 77.80% result conflicts with its own tables, so the central claim is currently unverifiable. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.00989 v1 pith:XK4RLLT6 submitted 2025-05-02 cs.CL

Sijin Sun , Liangbin Zhao , Ming Deng , Xiuju Fu This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CL

keywords vesseltrafficservicesText-to-SQLLLMagentmaritimesafetydomainadaptationknowledge-augmentedqueryinglinguisticstylevariationretrieval-augmentedgeneration

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that natural-language querying of vessel traffic databases is feasible enough for real operations. It reformulates risk-prone vessel identification as a knowledge-augmented Text-to-SQL task—turning operator requests into database queries with extra maritime rules and knowledge—and builds VTS-LLM, an agent with four adaptations: entity-recognition-based reasoning, domain-knowledge injection, a semantic algebra intermediate representation, and a query-rethink step. On its own VTS-SQL benchmark, the agent reports 77.80% accuracy on operational-style queries and beats general-purpose and SQL-focused baselines. The paper also claims to present the first empirical evidence that linguistic style—command, operational, or formal—systematically changes Text-to-SQL performance. If true, the work opens a path toward natural-language decision support for maritime traffic control and style-aware evaluation of text-to-SQL systems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the four-module VTS-LLM agent pipeline. Named-entity recognition performs hierarchical relational reasoning, resolving query entities such as place names and vessel types against the database before SQL generation. An agent-based domain-knowledge injection stage decomposes each query into subtasks and retrieves relevant maritime rules through retrieval-augmented generation. The semantic algebra intermediate representation maps the query onto relational-algebra operators—selection, projection, join—plus spatial predicates, bridging natural language and executable SQL. A query-rethink module then checks the draft SQL for semantic and logical consistency and corrects it. The evaluation uses a penalty-based match score that discounts predictions that over-select rows, reflecting the safety-critical cost of returning extra vessels.

What would settle it

Collect real VTS operator queries from operational logs, have independent VTS officers write the expected SQL answers, and rerun VTS-LLM and the baselines on that set; if the agent's accuracy drops to baseline levels on live queries, the reported benchmark advantage does not transfer to practice.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that risk-prone vessel identification in Vessel Traffic Services can be cast as a knowledge-augmented Text-to-SQL task and solved by a domain-adaptive LLM agent more accurately than off-the-shelf models. VTS-LLM combines hierarchical named-entity-recognition-based relational reasoning, agent-based injection of maritime knowledge, a semantic algebra intermediate representation that inserts spatial predicates into the query plan, and a query-rethink mechanism that validates and corrects draft SQL. The paper reports 72.60%, 77.80%, and 89.72% on command, operational, and formal linguistic styles respectively, with command-style queries hardest for all models; VTS-LLM nevertheless holds its largest margin there. The paper further claims this is the first empirical evidence that linguistic style variation introduces significant and systematic challenges in Text-to-SQL modeling, and that concise, fragmented operator phrasing is precisely where general models degrade most.

Load-bearing premise

The result depends on the VTS-SQL benchmark faithfully representing real VTS operator work: the queries were designed with operator input rather than taken from live operations, and the gold SQL was authored by the research team without independent operator validation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

VTS operators could ask short, urgent questions in their own working style and receive database-backed answers without writing SQL or navigating rigid interfaces.
Text-to-SQL systems evaluated only on formal, well-formed queries will overstate their usefulness in operational settings where commands are terse and fragmented.
The VTS-SQL dataset gives maritime and safety researchers a shared testbed for knowledge-augmented Text-to-SQL, with three stylistic variants of every query.
The four-module recipe—entity reasoning, knowledge injection, semantic algebra, query rethink—is transferable to other regulated, knowledge-intensive domains.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Beyond maritime, the style-sensitivity pattern likely appears in any operational field with compressed procedural language—aviation ground control, emergency dispatch, industrial process control—so future Text-to-SQL benchmarks should deliberately vary utterance style.
A testable extension would compare VTS-LLM against its own modules stripped one at a time on a much larger query set, and separately against a tuned retrieval-augmented baseline, to separate the contribution of retrieval, prompting, and the semantic algebra representation.
The paper's penalty metric suggests a broader principle for safety-critical Text-to-SQL evaluation: penalizing false-positive selections asymmetrically, since returning extra vessels wastes operator attention more than missing formatting nuances.
If the benchmark were rebuilt from live operator logs with gold SQL validated by independent VTS officers, the same agent could plausibly be extended to spoken input and automated radio responses, as the paper lists as future work.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know this paper before citing it: it proposes the first VTS-domain LLM agent and a VTS-specific Text-to-SQL benchmark, which is genuinely useful for an underserved area. But the headline number is not supported by the paper's own tables. Table IV's 'Ours' row averages 68.91, not 77.80; the 77.80 appears in a detached line labeled 'GPT-4o Score' with no clear configuration. The ablation text says dropping NER gives 74.25, while Table VI reports 72.45. The command-style score is 72.40 in one place and 72.60 in the conclusion. These are not typos you can wave away; they block verification of the strongest claim.

The new contribution is real: formalizing risk-prone vessel identification as knowledge-augmented Text-to-SQL, building a small but multi-style query-SQL test set, and showing that concise, operator-style queries are systematically harder for LLMs. That last finding is plausible and worth checking, though it rests on a self-authored benchmark with no external validation. The comparison against several strong baselines (GPT-4o, Claude, DeepSeek, etc.) is a plus, and the architecture—NER-based reasoning, RAG, semantic algebra, query rethink—is a reasonable combination of established pieces.

The soft spots are significant. The benchmark, metric, and gold SQL were all authored by the same team, so the evaluation is partly self-referential. The custom match score is defined but not justified against standard execution accuracy; no error bars or significance tests are reported. Code and data are promised but not actually linked in the text, so nothing is independently checkable. The 'first empirical evidence' claim is overreach given the small, self-created dataset.

Who is this for? Anyone working on Text-to-SQL in specialized, safety-critical domains, or on linguistic robustness of LLMs, might find the benchmark and the style-sensitivity observation useful after the numbers are sorted out. As written, I would not cite it yet. But I would send it to peer review: the topic deserves referee time, and a good referee could force the authors to reconcile the inconsistencies, release the artifacts, and tone down the claims. With those fixes, this could become a solid contribution to maritime NLP.

My honest recommendation: engage with it, but treat every reported number as provisional until the authors clarify what exactly the 77.80% corresponds to and make the code and data available.

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes VTS-LLM, an LLM-based agent for vessel traffic services (VTS), framing risk-prone vessel identification as a knowledge-augmented Text-to-SQL task. It introduces a self-constructed benchmark (schema, corpus, and query–SQL pairs in three linguistic styles) and an agent architecture with NER-based relational reasoning, agent-driven domain knowledge injection, a semantic algebra intermediate representation, and a query-rethink mechanism. The authors report that VTS-LLM achieves 77.80% on the operational query style and outperforms general-purpose and SQL-specialized baselines; they also claim the first empirical evidence that linguistic style variation systematically affects Text-to-SQL performance. The paper includes a comparison study, ablations, a sensitivity analysis across linguistic styles, and a custom penalty-based evaluation metric.

Significance. If the empirical claims are correct, this is a useful step toward applying LLM agents in a genuinely underexplored maritime domain. The paper contributes a new benchmark and a domain-adapted architecture, and the finding that terse command-style queries degrade text-to-SQL quality is practically important. The manuscript also contains concrete, falsifiable comparisons against several strong baselines (GPT-4o, DeepSeek, Gemini, Claude, and SQL-focused models). However, the significance is currently conditional on resolving several internal numerical inconsistencies that prevent verification of the central performance claim.

major comments (5)

[Section IV-C, Tables IV and V] The headline claim that 'our VTS-LLM achieves an overall accuracy of 77.80%' is not supported by the data as presented. In Table IV, the row labeled 'Ours' lists five scores (68.69, 68.76, 66.29, 74.30, 66.53) with an average of 68.91, and the figure 77.80 appears only in a detached line below the table reading 'GPT-4o Score 77.80' with no row or configuration label. Table V repeats the same 'Ours' row and adds 'Ours GPT-4o 77.80', but the paper nowhere states explicitly that the complete VTS-LLM system uses GPT-4o as its backbone. The authors must state which configuration produces 77.80%, whether it is the full system, and why the 'Ours' row in the same tables shows a different average. Without this clarification the central performance claim is unverifiable.
[Section IV-D, Table VI] The ablation text and table contradict each other. The text states that removing the NER module (row #2) drops accuracy to 74.25%, but Table VI reports 72.45% for that row. The text and table agree for rows #3 (74.06%) and #4 (70.22%), which makes the NER discrepancy more likely a typographical error rather than a deliberate difference. Which number is correct must be fixed, since the ablation is the only direct evidence for the contribution of the NER module.
[Section IV-E, Table VII, and Section V] The command-style score for VTS-LLM is reported inconsistently: Section IV-E text says '72.40%', while Table VII and Section V both report 72.60%. This is another instance where the reader cannot determine the real result. The inconsistency affects the sensitivity analysis, which is one of the paper's advertised contributions.
[Section V and Section IV-F] The claim that the paper provides 'the first empirical evidence that linguistic style variation can introduce significant and systematic challenges in Text-to-SQL modeling' is too strong given the evidence presented. The analysis in Table VII covers only two Claude models plus VTS-LLM, on a self-constructed benchmark, with no statistical significance testing or error bars. At most this is preliminary evidence for the studied models and data; the 'first' and 'systematic' wording should be tempered, and the authors should discuss prior work on paraphrased or adversarial text-to-SQL queries.
[Section II-C and IV-C] The evaluation rests entirely on a self-built benchmark (VTS-SQL) whose queries were designed by the authors and whose gold SQL was not validated by external VTS operators. No dataset or code link is provided in the paper, and no inter-annotator agreement or external validation is reported. Since every reported accuracy number is relative to this benchmark, the paper should include a more detailed description of dataset construction, release plans, and at least one form of external validation or a public release to enable independent checking.

minor comments (4)

[Throughout] There are typographical errors: 'noval' should be 'novel' in the Introduction; 'DeepSeep-R1' should be 'DeepSeek-R1' in Table IV; 'Sensitive Analysis' should be 'Sensitivity Analysis' in Section IV-E.
[Section II-C] The dataset statement says 'Dataset is available at VTS-SQL', but no URL or repository identifier is given. The same applies to the code and prompt details referenced in Section IV-C.
[Section IV-B, Eq. (3)] The evaluation metric definition is unclear for the 'otherwise' branch: if |GT| = 0 and |GP| > 0, the denominator in Bs is undefined. The authors should specify the boundary behavior of the metric.
[Tables IV and V] The formatting of the 'Ours' rows is confusing: the row is not aligned with the column of model names, and the separate 'GPT-4o Score' line would be better integrated into the table with a clear footnote or caption indicating the backbone.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found; the paper's claims rest on independent comparisons and the custom benchmark is a representativeness concern, not a circular derivation.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are (1) that VTS-LLM outperforms general-purpose and SQL-specialized baselines on the VTS-SQL benchmark and (2) that linguistic style variation systematically affects Text-to-SQL performance. Neither claim reduces to its own inputs by construction. The proposed components (NER-based reasoning, knowledge injection, semantic algebra, query rethink) are described as modular augmentations, and the evaluation compares the full system against external baselines using a fixed benchmark. The custom metric Ms is explicitly defined over ground-truth and predicted result sets (Equations 1-3); it does not embed any fitted parameter or encode the method's design, so the reported scores are not forced by the metric. The dataset is authored by the research team, and the gold queries were informed by professional VTS operators, which raises external-validity and representativeness concerns, but that is a correctness/benchmark-quality issue rather than a circularity: the paper does not derive the benchmark results from the benchmark definitions. There are no load-bearing self-citations: references [1]-[24] are external works, and no uniqueness theorem or prior result from the same authors is invoked to forbid alternatives or justify a central premise. The 'first empirical evidence' claim about linguistic style variation is supported by the sensitivity analysis across command, operational, and formal styles, and is not a tautology. The notable numeric inconsistencies (77.80% in text vs. the 'Ours' row average 68.91 in Table IV; ablation text 74.25% vs. Table VI 72.45%; command-style 72.40% vs. 72.60%) are serious internal-reporting problems, but they do not constitute circularity under the specified definitions. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity, score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central evaluation rests on assumptions that are stated but not independently established: the correctness of gold SQL, the representativeness of the authored test queries, and the completeness of the schema and knowledge corpus. The paper reports no inter-annotator agreement or operator validation. No free parameters are fitted to data, and no new physical or conceptual entities are introduced.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The gold SQL queries in VTS-SQL are correct and complete translations of the natural language queries.
Every accuracy score assumes the author-written gold SQL is ground truth; errors or alternate valid SQL would change all results. Introduced in Section II-C where the query-SQL test set is described.
domain assumption The query set is representative of real VTS operator language.
The paper says queries were designed based on input from professional operators but gives no collection protocol, number of operators, or validation step. Section II-C.
domain assumption The custom database schema and external knowledge corpus cover the information required for risk-prone vessel identification.
The system can only answer questions that are answerable from the provided tables and retrieval corpus; completeness is asserted but not demonstrated. Section II-C.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of VTS-LLM: Domain-Adaptive LLM Agent for Enhancing Awareness in Vessel Traffic Services through Natural Language." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XK4RLLT6

@misc{pith2026250500989,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: VTS-LLM: Domain-Adaptive LLM Agent for Enhancing Awareness in Vessel Traffic Services through Natural Language},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XK4RLLT6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.00989}
}

read the original abstract

Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) are essential for maritime safety and regulatory compliance through real-time traffic management. However, with increasing traffic complexity and the prevalence of heterogeneous, multimodal data, existing VTS systems face limitations in spatiotemporal reasoning and intuitive human interaction. In this work, we propose VTS-LLM Agent, the first domain-adaptive large LLM agent tailored for interactive decision support in VTS operations. We formalize risk-prone vessel identification as a knowledge-augmented Text-to-SQL task, combining structured vessel databases with external maritime knowledge. To support this, we construct a curated benchmark dataset consisting of a custom schema, domain-specific corpus, and a query-SQL test set in multiple linguistic styles. Our framework incorporates NER-based relational reasoning, agent-based domain knowledge injection, semantic algebra intermediate representation, and query rethink mechanisms to enhance domain grounding and context-aware understanding. Experimental results show that VTS-LLM outperforms both general-purpose and SQL-focused baselines under command-style, operational-style, and formal natural language queries, respectively. Moreover, our analysis provides the first empirical evidence that linguistic style variation introduces systematic performance challenges in Text-to-SQL modeling. This work lays the foundation for natural language interfaces in vessel traffic services and opens new opportunities for proactive, LLM-driven maritime real-time traffic management.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.00989 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** Agent-based Maritime Knowledge Injection Framework. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Hierarchical NER and Reasoning Framework for Maritime Query [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Schematic workflow of the SAIR module for VTS scenario. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Demos of our developed system with VTS-LLM agent in VTS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

[1]

Leveraging large language models for enhancing safety in maritime operations,

Tymoteusz Miller, Irmina Durlik, Ewelina Kostecka, Adrianna Łobodzi´nska, Kinga Łazuga, and Polina Kozlovska, “Leveraging large language models for enhancing safety in maritime operations,” Applied Sciences, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1666, 2025

work page 2025
[2]

Popeye: A unified visual-language model for multi- source ship detection from remote sensing imagery,

Wei Zhang, Miaoxin Cai, Tong Zhang, Guoqiang Lei, Yin Zhuang, and Xuerui Mao, “Popeye: A unified visual-language model for multi- source ship detection from remote sensing imagery,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing , 2024

work page 2024
[3]

Kunpeng: An embodied large model for intelligent maritime,

Naiyao Wang, Tongbang Jiang, Ye Wang, Shaoyang Qiu, Bo Zhang, Xinqiang Xie, Munan Li, Chunliu Wang, Yiyang Wang, Hongxiang Ren, et al., “Kunpeng: An embodied large model for intelligent maritime,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.09048 , 2024

arXiv 2024
[4]

Robust anomaly detection in unmanned ship systems based on large language models,

Dun Li, Huan Wang, and Yan-Fu Li, “Robust anomaly detection in unmanned ship systems based on large language models,” 2024

work page 2024
[5]

Advancing its applications with llms: A survey on traffic manage- ment, transportation safety, and autonomous driving,

Dingkai Zhang, Huanran Zheng, Wenjing Yue, and Xiaoling Wang, “Advancing its applications with llms: A survey on traffic manage- ment, transportation safety, and autonomous driving,” in International Joint Conference on Rough Sets . Springer, 2024, pp. 295–309

work page 2024
[6]

Research on the human-machine collaborative optimisation algorithm for intelligent traffic signal control systems,

Zhuoxun Li, Junju Chen, Kefan Wu, Zhanyi Wu, and Qiqi Liu, “Research on the human-machine collaborative optimisation algorithm for intelligent traffic signal control systems,” in 2024 International Conference on Computing, Robotics and System Sciences (ICRSS) . IEEE, 2024, pp. 33–41

work page 2024
[7]

Large lan- guage models (llms) as traffic control systems at urban intersections: A new paradigm,

Sari Masri, Huthaifa I Ashqar, and Mohammed Elhenawy, “Large lan- guage models (llms) as traffic control systems at urban intersections: A new paradigm,” Vehicles, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 11, 2025

work page 2025
[8]

Unist: A prompt-empowered universal model for urban spatio-temporal pre- diction,

Yuan Yuan, Jingtao Ding, Jie Feng, Depeng Jin, and Yong Li, “Unist: A prompt-empowered universal model for urban spatio-temporal pre- diction,” in Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining , 2024, pp. 4095–4106

work page 2024

Show all 24 references

[9]

Building transportation foundation model via generative graph transformer,

Xuhong Wang, Ding Wang, Liang Chen, Fei-Yue Wang, and Yilun Lin, “Building transportation foundation model via generative graph transformer,” in 2023 IEEE 26th International Conference on Intelli- gent Transportation Systems (ITSC) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 6042–6047

2023
[10]

Traffic performance gpt (tp-gpt): Real-time data informed intelligent chatbot for transportation surveillance and management,

Bingzhang Wang, Zhiyu Cai, Muhammad Monjurul Karim, Chenxi Liu, and Yinhai Wang, “Traffic performance gpt (tp-gpt): Real-time data informed intelligent chatbot for transportation surveillance and management,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03076 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[11]

Next-generation database interfaces: A survey of llm-based text-to-sql,

Zijin Hong, Zheng Yuan, Qinggang Zhang, Hao Chen, Junnan Dong, Feiran Huang, and Xiao Huang, “Next-generation database interfaces: A survey of llm-based text-to-sql,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.08426 , 2024

2024
[12]

Mac-sql: A multi-agent collaborative framework for text-to-sql,

Bing Wang, Changyu Ren, Jian Yang, Xinnian Liang, Jiaqi Bai, Linzheng Chai, Zhao Yan, Qian-Wen Zhang, Di Yin, Xing Sun, et al., “Mac-sql: A multi-agent collaborative framework for text-to-sql,” in Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 2...

2025
[13]

Mcs-sql: Leveraging multiple prompts and multiple-choice selection for text-to-sql generation,

Dongjun Lee, Choongwon Park, Jaehyuk Kim, and Heesoo Park, “Mcs-sql: Leveraging multiple prompts and multiple-choice selection for text-to-sql generation,” in Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics , 2025, pp. 337–353

2025
[14]

Can llm already serve as a database interface? a big bench for large- scale database grounded text-to-sqls,

Jinyang Li, Binyuan Hui, Ge Qu, Jiaxi Yang, Binhua Li, Bowen Li, Bailin Wang, Bowen Qin, Ruiying Geng, Nan Huo, et al., “Can llm already serve as a database interface? a big bench for large- scale database grounded text-to-sqls,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Syste...

2023
[15]

Cllms: Consistency large language models,

Siqi Kou, Lanxiang Hu, Zhezhi He, Zhijie Deng, and Hao Zhang, “Cllms: Consistency large language models,” in Forty-first Interna- tional Conference on Machine Learning , 2024

2024
[16]

Codes: Towards building open-source language models for text-to- sql,

Haoyang Li, Jing Zhang, Hanbing Liu, Ju Fan, Xiaokang Zhang, Jun Zhu, Renjie Wei, Hongyan Pan, Cuiping Li, and Hong Chen, “Codes: Towards building open-source language models for text-to- sql,” Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data , vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 1–28, 2024

2024
[17]

Text-to-sql empowered by large language models: A benchmark evaluation,

Dawei Gao, Haibin Wang, Yaliang Li, Xiuyu Sun, Yichen Qian, Bolin Ding, and Jingren Zhou, “Text-to-sql empowered by large language models: A benchmark evaluation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.15363 , 2023

2023 arXiv
[18]

Spider: A large-scale human-labeled dataset for complex and cross- domain semantic parsing and text-to-sql task,

Tao Yu, Rui Zhang, Kai Yang, Michihiro Yasunaga, Dongxu Wang, Zifan Li, James Ma, Irene Li, Qingning Yao, Shanelle Roman, et al., “Spider: A large-scale human-labeled dataset for complex and cross- domain semantic parsing and text-to-sql task,” in Proceedings of the 2018 Confe...

2018
[19]

Spider 2.0: Evaluating language models on real-world enterprise text-to-sql workflows,

Fangyu Lei, Jixuan Chen, Yuxiao Ye, Ruisheng Cao, Dongchan Shin, SU Hongjin, ZHAOQING SUO, Hongcheng Gao, Wenjing Hu, Pengcheng Yin, et al., “Spider 2.0: Evaluating language models on real-world enterprise text-to-sql workflows,” in The Thirteenth International Conference on L...

2018
[20]

Improving the domain adaptation of retrieval augmented generation (rag) models for open domain question answering,

Shamane Siriwardhana, Rivindu Weerasekera, Elliott Wen, Tharindu Kaluarachchi, Rajib Rana, and Suranga Nanayakkara, “Improving the domain adaptation of retrieval augmented generation (rag) models for open domain question answering,” Transactions of the Association for Computat...

2023
[21]

An llm compiler for parallel function calling,

Sehoon Kim, Suhong Moon, Ryan Tabrizi, Nicholas Lee, Michael W Mahoney, Kurt Keutzer, and Amir Gholami, “An llm compiler for parallel function calling,” in 41st International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024

2024
[22]

Blendsql: A scalable dialect for unifying hybrid question answering in relational algebra,

Parker Glenn, Parag Dakle, Liang Wang, and Preethi Raghavan, “Blendsql: A scalable dialect for unifying hybrid question answering in relational algebra,” in Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics ACL 2024 , 2024, pp. 453–466

2024
[23]

Rethinking the bounds of llm reasoning: Are multi-agent discussions the key?,

Qineng Wang, Zihao Wang, Ying Su, Hanghang Tong, and Yangqiu Song, “Rethinking the bounds of llm reasoning: Are multi-agent discussions the key?,” in Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), 2024, pp. 6106–6131

2024
[24]

Semantic evaluation for text-to- sql with distilled test suites,

Ruiqi Zhong, Tao Yu, and Dan Klein, “Semantic evaluation for text-to- sql with distilled test suites,” in Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) , 2020, pp. 396–411

2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Leveraging large language models for enhancing safety in maritime operations,

Tymoteusz Miller, Irmina Durlik, Ewelina Kostecka, Adrianna Łobodzi´nska, Kinga Łazuga, and Polina Kozlovska, “Leveraging large language models for enhancing safety in maritime operations,” Applied Sciences, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1666, 2025

work page 2025

[2] [2]

Popeye: A unified visual-language model for multi- source ship detection from remote sensing imagery,

Wei Zhang, Miaoxin Cai, Tong Zhang, Guoqiang Lei, Yin Zhuang, and Xuerui Mao, “Popeye: A unified visual-language model for multi- source ship detection from remote sensing imagery,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing , 2024

work page 2024

[3] [3]

Kunpeng: An embodied large model for intelligent maritime,

Naiyao Wang, Tongbang Jiang, Ye Wang, Shaoyang Qiu, Bo Zhang, Xinqiang Xie, Munan Li, Chunliu Wang, Yiyang Wang, Hongxiang Ren, et al., “Kunpeng: An embodied large model for intelligent maritime,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.09048 , 2024

arXiv 2024

[4] [4]

Robust anomaly detection in unmanned ship systems based on large language models,

Dun Li, Huan Wang, and Yan-Fu Li, “Robust anomaly detection in unmanned ship systems based on large language models,” 2024

work page 2024

[5] [5]

Advancing its applications with llms: A survey on traffic manage- ment, transportation safety, and autonomous driving,

Dingkai Zhang, Huanran Zheng, Wenjing Yue, and Xiaoling Wang, “Advancing its applications with llms: A survey on traffic manage- ment, transportation safety, and autonomous driving,” in International Joint Conference on Rough Sets . Springer, 2024, pp. 295–309

work page 2024

[6] [6]

Research on the human-machine collaborative optimisation algorithm for intelligent traffic signal control systems,

Zhuoxun Li, Junju Chen, Kefan Wu, Zhanyi Wu, and Qiqi Liu, “Research on the human-machine collaborative optimisation algorithm for intelligent traffic signal control systems,” in 2024 International Conference on Computing, Robotics and System Sciences (ICRSS) . IEEE, 2024, pp. 33–41

work page 2024

[7] [7]

Large lan- guage models (llms) as traffic control systems at urban intersections: A new paradigm,

Sari Masri, Huthaifa I Ashqar, and Mohammed Elhenawy, “Large lan- guage models (llms) as traffic control systems at urban intersections: A new paradigm,” Vehicles, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 11, 2025

work page 2025

[8] [8]

Unist: A prompt-empowered universal model for urban spatio-temporal pre- diction,

Yuan Yuan, Jingtao Ding, Jie Feng, Depeng Jin, and Yong Li, “Unist: A prompt-empowered universal model for urban spatio-temporal pre- diction,” in Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining , 2024, pp. 4095–4106

work page 2024