Table . A summary of the squared correlation coefficient (R 2 ), root mean square error (RMSE), and mean unsigned error (MUE) for ln γ ∞ i,j , and the average absolute percent deviation (AAPD) for γ ∞ i,j predicted using the SM12, SM8, and SMD universal solvent model as compared to the reference data from "Yaws' Handbook of Properties for Aqueous Systems" . For the predictions, we compare the case where 1) ∆G self i,i is predicted using the SM12, SM8, and SMD universal solvent model, and where 2) ∆G self i,i is computed using reference data, as indicated. The results are additionally separated into case where water was the solvent and where water was the solute, as indicated. The results here are consistent with the other data sets. Considering first ln γ ∞ i,j for the case of water as a solute when ∆G self i,i was computed using reference vapor pressure data. For all cases with SM12 and SM8 ln γ ∞ i,j is under predicted with an average error of 3.485 and 3.397, respectively. With SMD, ln γ ∞ i,j is under predicted for 85 of the 90 systems, with an average error of 2.834. On the other hand, when ∆G self i,i was also predicted, with SM12, SM8, and SMD the number of systems for which ln γ ∞ i,j was under predicted was 22, 13, and 17, respectively. And most importantly, with SM12, SM8, and SMD, the overall MUE noticeably decreased.