This inconsistency is rooted to the indirect nature of the approaches used to obtain the vdW parameters from experimental structural datasets. Conventionally, RvdW are derived from the position of the vdW peak in the distributions of contact distances between nonbonded atoms (Figure ). Such distributions represent a superposition of a gaussian curve due to the vdW peak, and a rapidly growing function due to the randomly distributed contacts (Figure ). Because the position of the vdW peak maximum (Dmax) is often hidden within the dataset for other contacts (Figure ), the sum of vdW radii is normally taken as the half-height of the vdW peak distance, Dhalf instead of the Dmax (Figure ). However, Dmax has more clear physical meaning: it is the distance corresponding to the energy minimum of the considered interaction. On the contrary, Dhalfbased vdW radii are qualitative, as interpretation of their sum is not straightforward. Although alternative knowledge-based and ab initio computational approaches to derive RvdW have been proposed, their universality and applicability are still rather limited.