The accuracy of the four new methods is compared to the original method in Table . The signed errors for the individual data points can be found in Table in the Supporting Information. As shown in Table , all four methods have consistently slightly better accuracy for barrier height than bond energies. In the discussion below, we will focus on the overall MUE. In all four methods, we ensure that the total density 𝜌𝜌(𝐫𝐫) is the sum of the effective spin densities 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑎𝑎 (𝐫𝐫) and 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑏𝑏 (𝐫𝐫). This is the only improvement in method 1, which gives a slight improvement in the overall MUE. As a workaround to overcome the negative 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑏𝑏 (𝐫𝐫), method 2 does not improve the accuracy of the DC functional. In methods 3 and 4, we not only conserve the total density 𝜌𝜌(𝐫𝐫), but we also have a more physically well-defined 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑎𝑎 (𝐫𝐫) and 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑏𝑏 (𝐫𝐫). All four methods have very similar errors as compared to the original method, with only minor differences, but as a side benefit of giving the effective spin densities 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑎𝑎 (𝐫𝐫) and 𝜌𝜌 � 𝑏𝑏 (𝐫𝐫) a clearer physical meaning, new methods 1, 3, and 4 have a slight improvement on the overall MUE, especially for methods 3 and 4, where a 9% decrease in overall MUE is observed.