Most of the above methods require extremely long trajectories and thorough phase sampling to yield converged thermodynamic quantities. Hence, most of the methods for computing interfacial entropies are practical only when performed with classical MD simulations rather than using ab initio or density functional theoretical (DFT) methods. Therefore, to our knowledge, information on water-metal entropy, free energy of formation, or surface tension at the ab initio quality is not available while studies on interfacial structure and capacitance are abundant. In the absence of DFT-quality data, perhaps the most accurate computational data available on metal-water thermodynamics has been obtained by combining a quantum mechanical (QM) description of metal with classical molecular mechanics (MM) model of water. For example, QM/MM-MD simulations by Gim et al. have provided insight on formation energies and wetting as well as linking them to interfacial structures. However, the MM force fields cannot properly describe interfacial electron transfer or the formation of metal-water covalent bonds. . The discrepancies between QM/MM-MD and DFT-MD can already be seen in the structures of metal-water interfaces: while MM and QM/MM methods predict a single peak in the water distribution at the interface for all the metals considered , DFT-MD simulations predict significantly more nuanced and varying distributions ranging from strongly adsorbed water molecules to more free, bulk-like water, depending on the metal element. .