Response to the commentary on "trace cisplatin adsorption by thiol-functionalized sponge (TFS) and Sn/SnO₂-coated TFS: Adsorption study and mechanism investigation".

This response addresses the Commentary by Lima et al. on our study "Trace cisplatin adsorption by thiol-functionalized sponge (TFS) and Sn/SnO₂-coated TFS: Adsorption study and mechanism investigation". The discussion focuses on three main issues: the interpretation of the Dubinin-Radushkevich mean adsorption energy, the treatment of equilibrium constants in adsorption thermodynamics, and the use of three temperature points in the van't Hoff analysis. We clarify that the D-R parameter E was not used as a standalone proof of chemisorption, but as supporting evidence interpreted together with adsorption behavior, surface chemistry, and spectroscopic observations. We further discuss why conversion of adsorption constants into thermodynamic equilibrium constants must depend on the assumptions of the underlying adsorption model, particularly for systems that are not well described by the Langmuir model. Finally, we acknowledge the statistical limitations of a three-temperature van't Hoff analysis, while arguing that limited statistical power should not be equated with mathematical invalidity. Overall, we emphasize that adsorption thermodynamic parameters should be interpreted within the physical and model-specific context of the investigated system.