<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Fine-Tuning on Kent Yao</title>
    <link>https://yaooqinn.github.io/tags/fine-tuning/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Fine-Tuning on Kent Yao</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.157.0</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://yaooqinn.github.io/tags/fine-tuning/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Just Asking an LLM to Rewrite SQL Does Almost Nothing</title>
      <link>https://yaooqinn.github.io/posts/query-engines/llm-only-rewrite-doesnt-work/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://yaooqinn.github.io/posts/query-engines/llm-only-rewrite-doesnt-work/</guid>
      <description>On TPC-H 10GB, asking GPT-4o to rewrite SQL takes mean execution time from 78.81s down to 74.92s — almost nothing. Swap in an open 14B model, feed it plans, add a reward, fine-tune once, and the same workload drops to 29.67s. Whether LLMs can help SQL rewriting is not a question about model strength; it&amp;rsquo;s a question about whether you&amp;rsquo;re willing to give the model the signals it actually needs.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
