This benchmark evaluates a model's ability to translate natural language questions into correct SQL queries across diverse, real-world database schemas. It specifically probes the model's capacity to handle complex, multi-operation statements and cross-domain syntax structures that are often underrepresented in traditional benchmarks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on SQL-Synth, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports execution accuracy (EX).
Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Sql Synth Eval?
Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-sql-synth-eval)
---
name: sql-synth-eval
description: This benchmark evaluates a model's ability to translate natural language questions into correct SQL queries across diverse, real-world database schemas. It specifically probes the model's capacity to handle complex, multi-operation statements and cross-domain syntax structures that are often underrepresented in traditional benchmarks. Use when the user wants to benchmark on SQL-Synth, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports execution accuracy (EX).
metadata:
skill_kind: dataset_eval
source_arxiv: 2511.13590
bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
confidence: high
---
# sql-synth-eval
> Beyond SELECT: A Comprehensive Taxonomy-Guided Benchmark for Real-World Text-to-SQL Translation — Wang et al. (2025) (arXiv:2511.13590, 2025)
## What this evaluates
This benchmark evaluates a model's ability to translate natural language questions into correct SQL queries across diverse, real-world database schemas. It specifically probes the model's capacity to handle complex, multi-operation statements and cross-domain syntax structures that are often underrepresented in traditional benchmarks.
## Datasets
- **SQL-Synth** — total ?; splits: train (-1), test (-1)
## Metrics
- `execution accuracy (EX)` **(primary)** — range: [0, 1]
- Measures whether the predicted SQL query produces the exact same execution results as the corresponding gold SQL query when run against the target database.
- `Data Quality Score` — range: [0, 1]
- Weighted average of LLM-as-a-judge ratings: (N_e*1 + N_g*0.75 + N_a*0.5 + N_p*0.25) / (N_e + N_g + N_a + N_p), where N_x is the count of samples rated Excellent, Good, Average, or Poor across question, SQL, and result aspects.
## Input / output format
**Input**: Natural language question paired with the target database schema (table names, columns, and relationships).
**Output**: A single SQL query string.
## Scoring recipe
```python
def compute_ex(predictions, golds, databases):
correct = 0
for pred, gold, db in zip(predictions, golds, databases):
try:
pred_res = execute_query(pred, db)
gold_res = execute_query(gold, db)
if sets_equal(pred_res, gold_res):
correct += 1
except Exception:
pass
return correct / len(predictions)
```
## Common pitfalls
- Execution accuracy requires a functional database engine to run queries; string matching or syntax checking alone will yield incorrect scores.
- The dataset intentionally includes complex, multi-operation queries across cross-domain schemas, so models may fail on schema alignment or syntax if evaluated without proper fine-tuning or context handling.
- The quality evaluation relies on GPT-4o as a judge, which may introduce bias or inconsistency compared to ground-truth execution metrics.
## Evidence (verbatim from paper)
> Following previous work, we use execution accuracy (EX) as the evaluation metric, which measures whether the predicted SQL query produces the same execution results as the corresponding gold SQL query.
## Citation
```bibtex
@misc{wang2025sqlsynth,
title={Beyond SELECT: A Comprehensive Taxonomy-Guided Benchmark for Real-World Text-to-SQL Translation},
author={Wang et al. (2025)},
year={2025},
note={arXiv:2511.13590}
}
```
- arXiv: 2511.13590