While different methods (from ab initio to MLIPs to classical force fields) have different shifts for the absolute energy values, BDEs may be directly compared, because they rely on energy differences. Similarly, BDE rankings for different molecules are even more directly comparable across different methods, because effects such as non-equivalent local minima discussed in the previous section are less relevant and the ranks are likely to be more consistent among all ab initio methods than the absolute BDE values. Furthermore, the order of C-H bond strengths for a given molecule is expected to be comparable, if not the same, as evaluated in terms of bond dissociation energies (property of interest in this work) and bond dissociation enthalpies (property predicted by the ALFABET model). Therefore, to compare different methods in their ability to predict BDEs, we primarily consider the distribution of correlation coefficients (middle panels) and the quality of the BDE rank correlations, including any outliers, in the top panels of Figure . The correlation of BDEs is included in the bottom row of panels in order to get a sense of outliers and general trends, rather than expecting a perfect correlation in the cases of AM1, GFN2-xTB and ALFABET.