Consequences of Overfitting the van der Waals Radii of Ions

12 December 2022, Version 1
This content is a preprint and has not undergone peer review at the time of posting.

Abstract

Atomic radii play important role in scientific research. The covalent radii of atoms, ionic radii of ions, and van der Waals (VDW) radii of neutral atoms can all be derived from crystal structures. However, the VDW radii of ions are a challenge to determine because the atomic distances in crystal structures were determined by a combination of the VDW interactions plus the electrostatic interactions, making it unclear how to define the VDW sphere of ions in such an environment. In the present study, we found that the VDW radii, which were determined based on the 0.0015 au electron density contour through a wavefunction analysis on atoms, have excellent agreement with the VDW radii of noble gas atoms determined experimentally. Based on this criterion, we calculated the VDW radii for various atomic ions across the periodic table, providing a systematic set of VDW radii of ions. Previously we have shown that the 12-6 Lennard-Jones nonbonded model could not simultaneously reproduce the hydration free energy (HFE) and ion-oxygen distance (IOD) for an atomic ion when its charge is +2 or higher. Because of this, we developed the 12-6-4 model to reproduce both properties at the same time by explicitly considering the ion-induced dipole interactions. However, recent studies showed it was possible to use the 12-6 model to simulate both properties simultaneously when an ion has the Rmin/2 parameter (i.e., the VDW radius) close to the Shannon ionic radius. In the present study, we show that such a “success” is due to an unphysical overfitting, as the VDW radius of an ion should be significantly larger than its ionic radius. Through molecular dynamics simulations, we show that such overfitting causes significant issues when transferring the parameters from ion-water systems to ion-ligand and metalloprotein systems. In comparison, the 12-6-4 model shows significant improvement in comparison to the overfitted 12-6 model, showing excellent transferability across different systems. In summary, although both the 12-6-4 and 12-6 models could reproduce HFE and IOD for an ion, the 12-6-4 model accomplishes such a task based on the consideration of the physics involved, while the 12-6 model accomplishes this through overfitting, which brings significant transferability issues when simulating other systems. Hence, we strongly recommend the use of the 12-6-4 model (or even more sophisticated models) instead of overfitted 12-6 models when simulating complex systems such as metalloproteins.

Supplementary materials

Title
Description
Actions
Title
Supporting Information
Description
Supporting tables and figures for the manuscript
Actions

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.