Consequences of Overfitting the van der Waals Radii of Ions

Atomic radii play important roles 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 VDW interactions and electrostatic interactions, making it unclear how to define the VDW sphere of ions in such an environment. In the present study, we found that 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 R_min/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.