Synthetic tabular data support use cases like data sharing, model development under access restrictions, and rapid prototyping of analytical workflows. Modern generative models are evaluated by their statistical similarity, correlation structure, privacy, and downstream machine-learning utility. However, such evaluations leave a gap: they rarely test the structure that matters for analytical queries. We present TabQueryBench, a query-centric benchmark for evaluating synthetic tabular data with SQL-shaped analytical queries. TabQueryBench distills 12 public query sources into 44 reusable query templates and grounds them to each dataset through a policy-guided template-to-SQL pipeline. Across 49 datasets and 11 generative models, it produces more than 100 executable queries per dataset while preserving cross-model comparability. Our evaluation reveals a substantial gap between conventional and query-centric fidelity. Even the strongest model, RealTabFormer, reaches only 0.76 +/- 0.23 query-centric fidelity compared with 1.00 for real data. Failures are most pronounced for high-cardinality attributes and local or tail queries, while model quality also trades off against generation cost. These results show that synthetic data can appear statistically realistic yet still fail to preserve the analytical behavior of real data, motivating query-centric fidelity as a necessary complement to existing evaluation metrics. We open source TabQueryBench to facilitate research in this direction.

翻译：暂无翻译