arXiv subjects

Tengjun Jin

Publications and source records attributed to Tengjun Jin.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

ELT-Bench-Verified: Benchmark Quality Issues Underestimate AI Agent Capabilities

Constructing Extract-Load-Transform (ELT) pipelines is a labor-intensive data engineering task and a high-impact target for AI automation. On ELT-Bench, the first benchmark for end-to-end ELT pipeline construction, AI agents initially showed low success rates, suggesting they lacked practical utility. We revisit these results and identify two factors causing a substantial underestimation of agent capabilities. First, re-evaluating ELT-Bench with upgraded large language models reveals that the extraction and loading stage is largely solved, while transformation performance improves significantly. Second, we develop an Auditor-Corrector methodology that combines scalable LLM-driven root-cause analysis with rigorous human validation (inter-annotator agreement Fleiss' kappa = 0.85) to audit benchmark quality. Applying this to ELT-Bench uncovers that most failed transformation tasks contain benchmark-attributable errors -- including rigid evaluation scripts, ambiguous specifications, and incorrect ground truth -- that penalize correct agent outputs. Based on these findings, we construct ELT-Bench-Verified, a revised benchmark with refined evaluation logic and corrected ground truth. Re-evaluating on this version yields significant improvement attributable entirely to benchmark correction. Our results show that both rapid model improvement and benchmark quality issues contributed to underestimating agent capabilities. More broadly, our findings echo observations of pervasive annotation errors in text-to-SQL benchmarks, suggesting quality issues are systemic in data engineering evaluation. Systematic quality auditing should be standard practice for complex agentic tasks. We release ELT-Bench-Verified to provide a more reliable foundation for progress in AI-driven data engineering automation.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Human-Level Text-to-SQL via Reinforcement Learning on Verified Data, Without Pipeline Engineering

Translating natural language questions to SQL queries (Text-to-SQL) is a long-standing problem in database research. Recent efforts have focused on improving accuracy by building increasingly complex multi-stage large LLM pipelines, layering task decomposition, schema linking, and model-based query selection on top of an LLM. Despite this growing complexity, a substantial gap (>10%) between such systems and human experts persists on benchmarks, suggesting that pipeline engineering alone has hit a ceiling. We show that human-level Text-to-SQL performance is achievable by fine-tuning an LLM using RLVR on clean data, without pipeline components. In this paper, we identified the dominant bottleneck for RLVR on Text-to-SQL: existing training data contains pervasive annotation errors that mislead optimization. To address this, we developed a multi-round, expert-driven verification pipeline and used it to curate BIRD-Platinum, a dataset of 2.5k verified instances sampled from BIRD Train, with errors corrected in 61% of instances. We show that fine-tuning Qwen3-235B on BIRD-Platinum yields consistent improvements (11-16%) over BIRD Train on Arcwise-Plat (an expert-verified version of BIRD) and Spider2, outperforming SOTA open-source systems by 0.6-16%. Furthermore, we diagnosed two failure modes of standard RLVR on Text-to-SQL. We find that (1) result-based rewards have non-trivial false positive rates, and (2) models systematically ignore the external knowledge in BIRD-style problems. To address them, we propose ReViSQL-BIRD, a specialized reward shaping method that combines result-based rewards with SQL equivalence verification and leverages process rewards for incentivizing external-knowledge use. We fine-tuned Kimi-K2.6 with ReViSQL-BIRD. On Arcwise-Plat, ReViSQL-BIRD-K2.6 is the first method to achieve human-level accuracy (92.96%), outperforming top five open-source systems by 10-22%.

cs.DB↗

arXiv2026

Accelerating Approximate Analytical Join Queries over Unstructured Data with Statistical Guarantees

Analytical join queries over unstructured data are increasingly prevalent in data analytics. Applying machine learning (ML) models to label every pair in the cross product of tables can achieve state-of-the-art accuracy, but the cost of pairwise execution of ML models is prohibitive. Existing algorithms, such as embedding-based blocking and sampling, aim to reduce this cost. However, they either fail to provide statistical guarantees (leading to errors up to 79% higher than expected) or become as inefficient as uniform sampling. We propose blocking-augmented sampling (BaS), which simultaneously achieves statistical guarantees and high efficiency. BaS optimally orchestrates embedding-based blocking and sampling to mitigate their respective limitations. Specifically, BaS allocates data tuples in the cross product into two regimes based on the failure modes of embeddings. In the regime of false negatives, BaS uses sampling to estimate the result. In the regime of false positives, BaS applies embedding-based blocking to improve efficiency. To minimize the estimation error given a budget for ML executions, we design a novel two-stage algorithm that adaptively allocates the budget between blocking and sampling. Theoretically, we prove that BaS asymptotically outperforms or matches standalone sampling. On real-world datasets across different modalities, we show that BaS provides valid confidence intervals and reduces estimation errors by up to 19$\times$, compared to state-of-the-art baselines.

cs.DB↗

arXiv2026

Pervasive Annotation Errors Break Text-to-SQL Benchmarks and Leaderboards

Researchers have proposed numerous text-to-SQL techniques to streamline data analytics and accelerate the development of data-driven applications. To compare these techniques and select the best one for deployment, the community depends on public benchmarks and their leaderboards. Since these benchmarks heavily rely on human annotations during question construction and answer evaluation, the validity of the annotations is crucial. In this paper, we conduct an empirical study that (i) benchmarks annotation error rates for two widely used text-to-SQL benchmarks, BIRD and Spider 2.0-Snow, and (ii) corrects a subset of the BIRD development (Dev) set to measure the impact of annotation errors on text-to-SQL agent performance and leaderboard rankings. Through expert analysis, we show that BIRD Mini-Dev and Spider 2.0-Snow have error rates of 52.8% and 62.8%, respectively. We re-evaluate all 16 open-source agents from the BIRD leaderboard on both the original and the corrected BIRD Dev subsets. We show that performance changes range from -7% to 31% (in relative terms) and rank changes range from $-9$ to $+9$ positions. We further assess whether these impacts generalize to the full BIRD Dev set. We find that the rankings of agents on the uncorrected subset correlate strongly with those on the full Dev set (Spearman's $r_s$=0.85, $p$=3.26e-5), whereas they correlate weakly with those on the corrected subset (Spearman's $r_s$=0.32, $p$=0.23). These findings show that annotation errors can significantly distort reported performance and rankings, potentially misguiding research directions or deployment choices. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/uiuc-kang-lab/text_to_sql_benchmarks.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Holistic Agent Leaderboard: The Missing Infrastructure for AI Agent Evaluation

AI agents have been developed for complex real-world tasks from coding to customer service. But AI agent evaluations suffer from many challenges that undermine our understanding of how well agents really work. We introduce the Holistic Agent Leaderboard (HAL) to address these challenges. We make three main contributions. First, we provide a standardized evaluation harness that orchestrates parallel evaluations across hundreds of VMs, reducing evaluation time from weeks to hours while eliminating common implementation bugs. Second, we conduct three-dimensional analysis spanning models, scaffolds, and benchmarks. We validate the harness by conducting 21,730 agent rollouts across 9 models and 9 benchmarks in coding, web navigation, science, and customer service with a total cost of about $40,000. Our analysis reveals surprising insights, such as higher reasoning effort reducing accuracy in the majority of runs. Third, we use LLM-aided log inspection to uncover previously unreported behaviors, such as searching for the benchmark on HuggingFace instead of solving a task, or misusing credit cards in flight booking tasks. We share all agent logs, comprising 2.5B tokens of language model calls, to incentivize further research into agent behavior. By standardizing how the field evaluates agents and addressing common pitfalls in agent evaluation, we hope to shift the focus from agents that ace benchmarks to agents that work reliably in the real world.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

Establishing Best Practices for Building Rigorous Agentic Benchmarks

Benchmarks are essential for quantitatively tracking progress in AI. As AI agents become increasingly capable, researchers and practitioners have introduced agentic benchmarks to evaluate agents on complex, real-world tasks. These benchmarks typically measure agent capabilities by evaluating task outcomes via specific reward designs. However, we show that many agentic benchmarks have issues in task setup or reward design. For example, SWE-bench Verified uses insufficient test cases, while TAU-bench counts empty responses as successful. Such issues can lead to under- or overestimation of agents' performance by up to 100% in relative terms. To make agentic evaluation rigorous, we introduce the Agentic Benchmark Checklist (ABC), a set of guidelines that we synthesized from our benchmark-building experience, a survey of best practices, and previously reported issues. When applied to CVE-Bench, a benchmark with a particularly complex evaluation design, ABC reduces the performance overestimation by 33%.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2025

ELT-Bench: An End-to-End Benchmark for Evaluating AI Agents on ELT Pipelines

Practitioners are increasingly turning to Extract-Load-Transform (ELT) pipelines with the widespread adoption of cloud data warehouses. However, designing these pipelines often involves significant manual work to ensure correctness. Recent advances in AI-based methods, which have shown strong capabilities in data tasks, such as text-to-SQL, present an opportunity to alleviate manual efforts in developing ELT pipelines. Unfortunately, current benchmarks in data engineering only evaluate isolated tasks, such as using data tools and writing data transformation queries, leaving a significant gap in evaluating AI agents for generating end-to-end ELT pipelines. To fill this gap, we introduce ELT-Bench, an end-to-end benchmark designed to assess the capabilities of AI agents to build ELT pipelines. ELT-Bench consists of 100 pipelines, including 835 source tables and 203 data models across various domains. By simulating realistic scenarios involving the integration of diverse data sources and the use of popular data tools, ELT-Bench evaluates AI agents' abilities in handling complex data engineering workflows. AI agents must interact with databases and data tools, write code and SQL queries, and orchestrate every pipeline stage. We evaluate two representative code agent frameworks, Spider-Agent and SWE-Agent, using six popular Large Language Models (LLMs) on ELT-Bench. The highest-performing agent, Spider-Agent Claude-3.7-Sonnet with extended thinking, correctly generates only 3.9% of data models, with an average cost of $4.30 and 89.3 steps per pipeline. Our experimental results demonstrate the challenges of ELT-Bench and highlight the need for a more advanced AI agent to reduce manual effort in ELT workflows. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/uiuc-kang-lab/ELT-Bench.

cs.DB↗

arXiv2025

PilotDB: Database-Agnostic Online Approximate Query Processing with A Priori Error Guarantees (Technical Report)

After decades of research in approximate query processing (AQP), its adoption in the industry remains limited. Existing methods struggle to simultaneously provide user-specified error guarantees, eliminate maintenance overheads, and avoid modifications to database management systems. To address these challenges, we introduce two novel techniques, TAQA and BSAP. TAQA is a two-stage online AQP algorithm that achieves all three properties for arbitrary queries. However, it can be slower than exact queries if we use standard row-level sampling. BSAP resolves this by enabling block-level sampling with statistical guarantees in TAQA. We simple ment TAQA and BSAP in a prototype middleware system, PilotDB, that is compatible with all DBMSs supporting efficient block-level sampling. We evaluate PilotDB on PostgreSQL, SQL Server, and DuckDB over real-world benchmarks, demonstrating up to 126X speedups when running with a 5% guaranteed error.

cs.DB↗