Complexes within this category interacts mostly via π-electrons. Here we show the interaction energy curve of Benzene-water dimer as our representative system(fig. ). As expected, the magnitude of QDO correction here is in between those from previous two sections. While the error due to D2 correction is not much, our correction is signficantly better than D2 here. However, here the D2 approximates the long-range correction much better compared to our method. This may be due to the change of polarizability of fragments at different intermonomer distances which is not considered in our method. In future, therefore, such information should be incorporated in our method. Similar to previously mentioned systems, interaction energy by DF approximations gets better with QDO correction. The deviations of PBE-QDO and PBE-D2 from the CCSD(T) are presented in Fig. . Our results deviate from CCSD(T) by more than 1 kcal/mol only for ethyne-AcOH and peptide-ethene. For majority of complexes, PBE-QDO predicts under-binding. This feature has also been observed for dispersion-dominated complexes. As expected, for systems with large dispersion energy component, the QDO correction becomes more significant (Fig. ). We find that for most of these systems dispersion correction constitutes < 40% of total binding energies. Statistically, (Table-4) we find that both D2 and QDO improves PBE binding energies. However, our method appears to work slightly better than D2.