Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Kyle Luoma
dblp:400/4553
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
0009-0003-9921-1632ORCID · reported
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Databases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 2 · 2 first-author · 2 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper |
Data models and query languages · 50% Database theory · 50% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Language models and text generation · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Database theory
database schema |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | SNAILS: Schema Naming Assessments for Improved LLM-Based SQL Inference · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2025 |
Data models and query languages › natural language interface › natural language interface to database
text-to-SQL |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | SNAILS: Schema Naming Assessments for Improved LLM-Based SQL Inference · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | SNAILS: Schema Naming Assessments for Improved LLM-Based SQL Inference · Proc. ACM Manag. Data 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
zero-shot prompting · 1.7schema naturalness modification · 1.7
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | A Comparative Evaluation of Schema Subsetting for LLM-based NL-to-SQL over Large-Schema Databases
Kyle Luoma, Arun Kumar 0001 |
Proc. VLDB Endow. | 1 |
| 2025 | SNAILS: Schema Naming Assessments for Improved LLM-Based SQL InferenceabstractLarge Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized Natural Language to SQL (NL-to-SQL), dominating most NL-to-SQL benchmarks. But LLMs still face limitations due to hallucinations, semantic ambiguity, and lexical mismatches between an NL query and the database schema. Naturally, a lot of work in the ML+DB intersection aims to mitigate such LLM limitations. In this work, we shine the light on a complementary data-centric question: How should DB schemas evolve in this era of LLMs to boost NL-to-SQL? The intuition is that more NL-friendly schema identifiers can help LLMs work better with DBs. We dive deeper into this seemingly obvious, but hitherto underexplored and important, connection between schema identifier ''naturalness'' and the behavior of LLM-based NL-to-SQL by creating a new integrated benchmark suite we call SNAILS. SNAILS has 4 novel artifacts: (1) A collection of real-world DB schemas not present in prior NL-to-SQL benchmarks; (2) A set of labeled NL-SQL query pairs on our collection not seen before by public LLMs; (3) A notion of naturalness level for schema identifiers and a novel labeled dataset of modified identifiers; and (4) AI artifacts to automatically modify identifier naturalness. Using SNAILS, we perform a comprehensive empirical evaluation of the impact of schema naturalness on LLM-based NL-to-SQL accuracy, and present a method for improving LLM-based NL-to-SQL with natural views. Our results reveal statistically significant correlations across multiple public LLMs from OpenAI, Meta, and Google on multiple databases using both zero-shot prompting as well as more complex NL-to-SQL workflows: DIN SQL, and CodeS. We present several fine-grained insights and discuss pathways for DB practitioners to better exploit LLMs for NL-to-SQL. Kyle Luoma, Arun Kumar 0001 |
Proc. ACM Manag. Data | 1 |