REVIEW 1 cited by
Cooperative SQL Generation for Segmented Databases By Using Multi-functional LLM Agents
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Cooperative SQL Generation for Segmented Databases By Using Multi-functional LLM Agents
read the original abstract
Text-to-SQL task aims to automatically yield SQL queries according to user text questions. To address this problem, we propose a Cooperative SQL Generation framework based on Multi-functional Agents (CSMA) through information interaction among large language model (LLM) based agents who own part of the database schema seperately. Inspired by the collaboration in human teamwork, CSMA consists of three stages: 1) Question-related schema collection, 2) Question-corresponding SQL query generation, and 3) SQL query correctness check. In the first stage, agents analyze their respective schema and communicate with each other to collect the schema information relevant to the question. In the second stage, agents try to generate the corresponding SQL query for the question using the collected information. In the third stage, agents check if the SQL query is created correctly according to their known information. This interaction-based method makes the question-relevant part of database schema from each agent to be used for SQL generation and check. Experiments on the Spider and Bird benckmark demonstrate that CSMA achieves a high performance level comparable to the state-of-the-arts, meanwhile holding the private data in these individual agents.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Agentic LLMs for Question Answering over Tabular Data
A five-stage NL-to-SQL pipeline with GPT-4o achieves 70.5% on DataBench QA and 71.6% on DataBench Lite QA, beating baselines of 26% and 27%.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.