Journal Author Guidesreputable journals' Instructions-for-Authors

Instructions for Authors — Physical Review Research

Source: https://journals.aps.org/authors/tips-authors-physical-review-physical-review-letters

Opens in a new window Opens an external website Opens an external website in a new window

When you first log into the new submission server you will notice that there are headings listed with the different phases of processing your manuscript goes through at the editorial office. (You may or may not see all of these, depending on what stage your manuscript is at.) So what do they mean?

On the upper left side of the page you will notice your name, email address, and affiliation. Simply click on the Update button to change any of this information if necessary.

Click on this button and you can start the submission of a new manuscript. (As well as update your contact information if needed.)

You have started a new submission and chosen to save it for later or did not hit the submit button when you were finished.

A completed (re)submission will appear here until APS submissions staff process it.

You have been sent a message regarding your manuscript from the editors; no further action will be taken on the manuscript until we hear back from you.

When your (re)submission is processed it will appear under this heading until it is sent out for review or the editor contacts you with other information.

Your manuscript is currently out for review.

When your paper has been accepted or published it will appear under this heading with a link to the accepted or published paper.

See PDF sent to Referee(s)– Go to the Under Review heading and click on the APS manuscript code (highlighted in red). It will bring you to an information page for that manuscript where you can click on the “Download Manuscript PDF” option. This is the current PDF sent to the referee(s). Check Status- At any time you can click on the “Status” link, to the far right of where the APS manuscript code number appears, to find the status of your manuscript as it is being processed. From there you can also see the details of your (re)submission or contact the editors regarding the (re)submission as well if you should have any concerns.

Consider whether you wish color figures in print or whether color online only and grayscale in print will be adequate. Be aware that color figures in print incur substantial charges for which authors and their institutions are responsible. Please see the Color-in-Print memo for our pricing and payment policy. If the article is accepted, these charges must be paid before it can be forwarded to our composition vendor for publication. Electronic figures submitted in color (PostScript or EPS preferred) will be published online in color at no extra charge to authors. Note, however, that grayscale images printed from color figures do not generally have monotonic gray scales.

For color online figures only, take care to ensure that captions and text references to the figures are appropriate for both the online color and print grayscale versions, and that the figure will be sufficiently clear in both versions. (The same figure file is used for both the print and the online versions.)

Check the accuracy of your references. (Avoid broken links in the online version of the journal.)

Include the complete source information for any references cited in the abstract. (Do not cite reference numbers in the abstract. Abstracts are reprinted in various abstract journals and databases where the numerical citation is not useful.)

Number references in text consecutively, starting with [1].

If your native language is not English, please consider enlisting the help of an English-speaking colleague in preparing the text.

Use a spell checker. (Referees are not favorably impressed by careless mistakes.)

At initial submission, a PDF version of your paper is all that’s needed for it to be sent for peer review.

Before uploading to our submissions server, we advise that you confirm that your files compile correctly by generating a PDF locally, using an authoring tool such as Overleaf.

Submit electronic files in REVTeX (preferred), LaTeX, and MSWord. Portable Document Format (PDF) or PostScript files may delay the publication of your manuscript.

Figures should be submitted separately. We prefer PostScript or EPS files.

Please use standard Windows fonts in any Word document. If you use an unusual font, we will probably not have it and, therefore, be unable to convert your Word document to PDF for viewing.

We recommend conventional file naming (plain ascii without punctuation or spaces) and a flat directory structure; non-conforming file names and subdirectories will prevent successful preview PDF generation.

If submitting from a large collaboration, please follow the Guidelines for Collaboration Submissions to ensure proper coding of the author list in your REVTeX file.

Include figures in your Word document as pictures. Include equations by using Design Science's MathType equation editor rather than Word's built-in editor, and tables by using Word's Table Editor. Please do not embed any of these items as objects, since this will cause a problem with our conversion of your file to PDF.

Submit separate figure files (PostScript or EPS preferred) in addition to embedding the figures in the manuscript if you submit in MS Word or PDF format. Although we discourage the use of any unusual fonts, if it is necessary, please embed these type fonts in your PostScript or EPS files so that we are able to generate proper output.

For REVTeX and LaTeX files, please run BibTeX before submitting your paper, and read-in (i.e., \input) or paste the resulting .bbl file within the reference section of your paper.

If your attempted submission is not successful, please do not begin a new submission. Please continue with the same attempted submission, or send a message to help@aps.org for further assistance. Do not start numerous, unnecessary submissions.

For more information, see the Web Submission Guidelines.”

With your submission, include a list of possible referees who are experts on the subject matter and not your close colleagues. Please consider including younger individuals who, while possibly less well known, are sufficiently knowledgeable to be effective referees.

In any resubmission letter, provide (1) a concise summary of your rebuttal to the major points of criticism raised by the referees, (2) a point by point, polite, professional response to the referee reports, and (3) a list of changes.

If your paper is accepted, please check the proofs carefully, even if you have submitted your paper as an electronic file. (The conversion, copy-editing, and formatting processes will inevitably introduce changes and some errors might result.)

December 2010

Please check the author list carefully. For large collaborative efforts of 50 or more authors, the author byline is subjected to an automated process. It is ultimately the responsibility of the authors to ensure that the list is correct and up to date.

Large collaborations are encouraged to use the new SPIRES Collaboration Author Lists XML format to submit their author lists; the authors.xml file should be provided along with the other submission files. This file should be kept up to date if any changes to the author list are made in revisions.

Collaborations may also continue to use a TeX format for author lists. The following guidelines will ensure that the author lists received in this format will be processed correctly as far as possible.

The following is an example of a portion of an acceptably coded TeX-format author list for a collaboration:

\author{N.~Arnaud}

\author{J.~B\'equilleux}

\author{A.~D'Orazio}

\affiliation{University of California at Irvine, Irvine, California 92697, USA }

\author{M.~Davier}

\author{J.~Firmino da Costa}

\author{G.~Grosdidier}

\author{A.~H\"ocker}

\affiliation{Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, United Kingdom }

\collaboration{The Sample Collaboration}

\noaffiliation

March 2025

Welcome to the APS journal submission process. Whether you're a first-time author or a returning author, this guide will provide you with essential information to navigate our submission system.

For instructions on preparing your manuscript as well as journal specific requirements, please refer to the Information for Authors section for your chosen journal.

All submissions and resubmissions are processed through our online submission server where you can also monitor the progress of your manuscript through peer review. To get started, create an APS Journal account here. Once your account is set up, you can log in to our submission server and begin the submission process.

Once logged in, click on Create a New Submission to begin. You'll be directed to the Initial Submission page, where you'll first see your contact information displayed at the top. If any details are outdated, simply click the Update button to make changes. APS highly recommends that all authors create and link their ORCID here as and the corresponding author will be required to provide their ORCID. If you already have one, it’s a good time to add it to your profile here.

You will then have the option to add your arXiv number if applicable. This will allow for direct submission via arXiv. If you do not wish to directly upload from arXiv, you will be given the opportunity to provide your arXiv id later in the process.

Next, indicate whether this submission is on behalf of a collaboration. Note: For large collaborations, please follow the collaboration submission guidelines to ensure that long author lists are extracted correctly.

Important: Once you proceed from this initial page, the information provided cannot be changed. If you need to update the journal selection, it’s best to start over at this point.

The “Manage Files” page allows you to upload and identify the files you want to upload.

We only require a PDF file for a new submission and resubmissions. For PDF submissions, all textual material and figures should be in a single file. Any supplemental material should be submitted as a separate PDF file via the "Upload supplemental files" button and cited as a reference in the manuscript. More information is available here

Source files, e.g., .tex files, figure files, etc., will not be requested until acceptance.

This page facilitates the collection of essential data for our manuscript database. Certain details are mandatory, and you won't be able to proceed with submission until they are provided. We can automatically extract and display specific information, requiring only your verification. However, for certain files, we may be unable to extract data. In such instances, you'll need to manually provide the required information for each author.

For APS purposes, we only track affiliations at the university college, or corporation level, not at the level of individual departments or centers. The association with an affiliation here in no way affects the presentation of affiliations (bylines) within the manuscript itself or the final publication should it be accepted.

To add or edit an affiliation entry click on "Fix” found to the right of each author’s name.

You will then be able to enter Family Name, Given/other names, and that author's email address. Then click "Add affiliation" and in the "search" field type in the Institution name (i.e., Argonne National). Under the "Results" will be options. Clicking the button will then autofill an address for Argonne National Lab. Click "Save". The affiliation should now show on the Add an affiliation page. Click "Save" again.

If you do not see the affiliation represented, you can type None in the search, and below you will be given the option to enter your affiliation's data.

It is again important to note that we are not looking for departments or Laboratories; we would just like to have the primary name of the Institute or University. Also note that all of the affiliation information provided on the submissions server does not replace the affiliation information on an author's manuscript.

Next, you will be asked to specify the corresponding author. This is meant to be the person managing your submission on behalf of all authors during peer review This individual represents all listed authors during the peer-review process and must be designated for every submission. The corresponding author takes responsibility for certifying the submission and handling all correspondence to APS on behalf of all authors.

Note that the corresponding author selected will determine eligibility for certain open access agreements based on their affiliation. Only one person can hold this role.

However, one or more authors may indicate their email address on the published paper and serve as the point of contact for readers, researchers, or other interested parties. Contact authors only need to be listed in the manuscript itself and can be changed or updated at resubmission. Contact authors (who are not also the corresponding author selected above) are not eligible for open access agreements.

On this page you will find information about your publication options and any associated costs. This page also clarifies APS’s policies on preprint posting, manuscript sharing, and the use of open access licenses.

Physical Review journals require data availability details for all research data necessary to verify or replicate your results. This information will be shared with editors and reviewers and used to create a data availability statement. See the APS policy on data availability.

Physical Review considers research data to be any recorded factual material used to produce the results, such as tabular data, code, software, graphs, images, audio, documents, video, raw and/or processed data, numerical data or any data presented in a plot.

A reference will be required if your article is accepted for publication. More information on data citation can be found in the author guidelines.

This page allows us to capture necessary information for our manuscript database. Certain information is required and you will be unable to proceed with the submission until it has been gathered. We are able to extract and display certain information so you need only verify it. However, if we are unable to extract information, you must manually add it.

If your text file includes author names shown with Chinese, Japanese, or Korean characters, please check the box to indicate this.

PhySH (Physics Subject Headings) is a physics classification scheme developed by the APS to organize and classify papers published in the APS journals. You will be required to take a few moments to provide appropriate PhySH terms (concepts) for your article by following these guidelines for authors. You can learn more about PhySH at the main PhySH site.

To add PhySH terms, first choose your category (Theoretical/Experimental), then click “Add terms.” You will be brought to a screen to search disciplines. Utilize the search box to find a specific term, or search from the list. Once found, click the checkmark to move the term to the Selected Concepts column (on the right). Be sure to Star one of these concepts as your primary. Click “Submit” to finish.

Note that: Physical Review X, Physical Review Applied, and Physical Review Research use a subject area list in addition to PhySH to classify articles; up to three subject areas may be assigned for each article.

This section gives the author the option to provide any additional information you think may be useful to the editor.

To indicate a joint submission, note in your cover letter that the two papers are being submitted together (be sure to include the title of the joint paper).

For certain manuscripts, you will need to tell us why your manuscript is suitable for submission to that journal or section. Here you are encouraged to suggest the names of potential referees. Such suggestions are particularly welcome when a manuscript treats a highly specialized subject. The editors are, of course, not constrained to select a referee from those suggested. Please note: If you suggest the names of referees at any time, we will retain that information in our database. However, the names will not be editable upon resubmission (although you will have the opportunity to enter more names then).

Physical Review X, PRX Energy, and PRX Quantum require authors to submit a succinct, nontechnical popular Summary that conveys to nonspecialist readers, and even nonscientific readers, the context, the essential message(s) and the significance of the work. The Summary should be concise and no longer than 250 words in length. A final, editorially approved version of the Summary will appear together with the article.

Authors may submit the Summary when making initial submission of their article. They may also submit the Summary, or any revised version of it, at appropriate stages during the review/editorial process. However, delayed post-acceptance submission of the Summary will lead to a delay in the processing of the article toward publication. Therefore we strongly recommend that submission of the Summary be made sufficiently early in the review process.

While the Popular Summary may be subject to certain editorial revision whenever necessary, the responsibility of ensuring the readability, scientific objectiveness, and broad appeal of the Summary lies primarily with its authors.

See the Publishing Guidelines section of the relevant journal for more information on what each journal requires.

The final page of the submission process serves as a review of your submission so far and gives you the opportunity to revisit and revise almost all steps in the submission process (aside from the initial submission page). If any of the information is incorrect, or you want to change it for any reason, you may do so from this page by clicking “Revisit” in any of the sections. When you have verified all the information, click on the "Submit Manuscript" button.

Immediately upon doing so, a web page will be displayed confirming your submission, and an email confirmation will be sent to you. You will also be presented with an opportunity to leave feedback about the process.

After submission and processing by our Submissions staff your manuscript will receive editorial attention. You can expect to hear by email from the Editorial Offices with a permanent APS manuscript code number within 2 business days.

After a manuscript code has been assigned to your paper, you can:

To resubmit a manuscript and/or figure files, the corresponding author will log in to the submissions server at: https://authors.aps.org/Submissions with your APS Journal account username and password.

You will see all manuscripts listed that are awaiting author action in the "Active" section. Click on the title or "View Details" button of the manuscript you wish to resubmit, and then select "Resubmit or respond to comments".

You will be prompted to enter a response to the editor and/or referees either in the text box and/or by uploading a file containing the response. For example:

On the next page, you will be prompted to upload/replace any manuscript files (including supplemental material).

You will then have the opportunity to update your data availability statement , abstract, and PhySH terms. Be sure to continue on until you hit the "Resubmit manuscript" button.

To transfer your manuscript to another APS Journal, log into your My Submissions page and click on the title or "View Details" button for the manuscript you wish to transfer.

You will see options in blue; click on the "Transfer to another APS journal" button to begin the process.

Once your manuscript has been accepted, we will request you upload your most up to date source files (if you have not done so already). Log on to your My Submissions page. Your accepted manuscript will have the status "editorially approved but need author response." Click on the title or "View Details" button of your accepted manuscript and click on the "Complete Accepted Tasks" button. You will have the option to provide a response. This is not required. Next, on the "Manage Files" page, you will be asked to upload your source files.

Text files should be formatted in REVTeX (preferred) or LaTeX. The file must be in ASCII containing no control codes, with line lengths of 80 characters or less. Submissions in MSWord, are also acceptable; although their use is extremely limited in the production process.

All textual material of the paper (including tables, captions, etc.) should be in electronic form, as a single file. Consult the APS Journals Style Guide or RMP's Style Guide for detailed information on use of notations, headings, footnotes, etc.

The advantage of using the REVTeX macro package is the file will be used in the production of the copy-edited proof and final published article, via a conversion process to our production formats. The conversion process ignores most formatting instructions and instead captures the structure "tagged" by the REVTeX macros (for example the title in a \title{} macro), rendering the final manuscript in the standard style for the journal.

Please use the REVTeX macros, character sets, and other LaTeX commands as outlined in the REVTeX Input Guide and the examples accompanying the macro package. Additional low-level formatting commands and macros should not be introduced, although keystroke-saving macros (for example: \def\be{\begin{equation}}) are acceptable. Text and math fonts, line spacing, type size, headings, margins, table and equation layout, and detailed character positioning are among the items controlled by the production process, and should not be the focus of significant author effort. If exceptions to the standard style are necessary they may be introduced at the proof stage.

The REVTeX software (macros, examples, and documentation) is freely available via ftp to aps.org in the /pub/revtex directory. For further information on REVTeX, inquire by sending an email to revtex@aps.org.

Once all your files have been uploaded they should be clearly identified, this is especially important for the figures and any Supplemental Material. You must have one file that constitutes the body - or text - of your manuscript, regardless of its format. You should describe this file as being "Main text file" or "Main text incl. Figures" (when the figures and tables are included in the text file).

Add another paragraph: Once your source files have been uploaded, you will have the option to preview the PDF that we will generate from your source files. You can then revisit your data availability statement, abstract, and PhySH terms if needed. On the Finish/Review page, you can revisit other related pages if needed. Click the "Resubmit manuscript" button when ready.

Editorial Policies and Practices

The Physical Review journals are published by the American Physical Society (APS). As society publications, the journals strive to meet the needs and represent the values of a global research community. The Physical Review editors develop and maintain their policies and practices in consultation with scientists from around the world to ensure the journals uphold the highest standards for quality, integrity, and scientific excellence.

The editorial policies and practices described below apply to all journals published by APS. Authors, reviewers, editors, and Editorial Board members are expected to comply with these policies.

Information about a journal’s editorial criteria, article types, or submission guidelines is available on each journal’s Information for Authors page. Questions and comments should be directed to APS Help.

Editorial Oversight and Decision Making

The editors of each journal are responsible for that journal’s scientific content and editorial matters, in alignment with the policies and practices. (See also Editorial Roles in the Physical Review journals.)

Authorship

Criteria for Authorship

Authorship Changes

Responsibilities of Authors

Author Affiliations

Use of ORCID iDs

Criteria for Authorship

Recognizing an individual’s contributions to research is essential for a fair and equitable scientific enterprise. All individuals who contributed significantly to at least one of the following aspects of the reported results should be listed as authors:

Individuals who have made other contributions should be listed in the Acknowledgments section. (See details about acknowledgments policy in Byline Addresses, Footnotes to the Byline, Acknowledgments, and Statements about Authors.)

Large collaborations. Physical Review recognizes authorship agreements for large collaborations, provided that authorship is determined through a transparent process.

Artificial intelligence writing tools. AI writing tools cannot be listed as an author but can be added in the Acknowledgments. See Appropriate Use of AI-Based Writing Tools.

Contact emails. Active email addresses are required for all authors at submission to ensure that editors can contact any author as needed. Large collaborations may provide a Collaboration Spokesperson email address in lieu of email addresses for individual authors.

Authorship Changes

Requests to add or remove an author, or to reorder the authorship list after the initial submission must be accompanied by a brief justification and must be made by the Corresponding Author before the paper is accepted. The added or removed author(s) must be copied in the request and consent to the change before it will be implemented.

During peer review, the Corresponding Author may transfer the Corresponding Author role to a co-author. Requests for this transfer require consent from the current and new Corresponding Author.

Responsibilities of Authors

All authors are accountable for the work presented in the paper.

Corresponding author. This individual represents all listed authors during the peer-review process and must be designated for every submission. The Corresponding Author should inform all authors of the submission of a paper and the outcome of important steps in the review process.

The Corresponding Author’s affiliation at the time of submission determines eligibility for certain institutional Open Access agreements and transformative agreements.

By submitting the manuscript, the Corresponding Author certifies the following:

Post-publication contact author(s). One or more authors may indicate their email address on the published paper and serve as the point of contact for readers, researchers, or other interested parties. Contact Authors do not have to be the Corresponding Author.

Author contributions. All authors should be able to identify their specific contribution to the work. APS strongly encourages authors to outline their contributor roles using the CRediT taxonomy. See also Byline Addresses, Footnotes to the Byline, Acknowledgments, and Statements about Authors.

Author Affiliations

Authors must use the affiliation(s) where the research was conducted. Current affiliations where research was not conducted can be included as byline footnotes. See also Byline Addresses, Footnotes to the Byline, Acknowledgments, and Statements about Authors.

Use of ORCID iDs

ORCID digital identifiers allow authors to preserve their research identity and connection to their publications throughout their careers. ORCID iDs are required for all Corresponding Authors and are strongly encouraged for all other authors. APS requires authors to authenticate their identifiers via the ORCID verification process. Verification requests are sent shortly after submission to all authors who have provided an email address, and authors are asked to follow through as soon as possible. Adding ORCID iDs after a paper is accepted is possible but may cause production delays.

Authors who have verified their ORCID on a previous submission will need to repeat the steps for every future paper they coauthor.

Submissions, Resubmissions, and Transfers

Receipt Dates and Revised Dates

Relation to Prior Materials

Transfers Between Journals

References to Other Work

Supplemental Material

For information on manuscript preparation, style guidelines, and submission criteria, see the Information for Authors section of the relevant journal.

Receipt Dates and Revised Dates

The receipt date indicates the date the manuscript was first received through the Submissions Server. This date is verified by the editor and appears in the published article. Manuscripts transferred between Physical Review journals usually retain the original receipt date. If authors make substantive changes to a manuscript, it may be given a revised date, which also appears if the paper is published. In cases of major delays or changes, a resubmitted manuscript may be given a new receipt date.

Relation to Prior Materials

Previously published manuscripts or those being considered for publication elsewhere cannot be considered for publication in Physical Review journals.

Theses, dissertations, and conference proceedings. The Physical Review journals generally welcome manuscripts based on results published in a thesis or dissertation. Results previously reported in conference proceedings may also be acceptable; editors will weigh factors such as the degree of overlap, the audience and format for the proceedings, and whether the proceedings were peer reviewed.

Disclosing previous work. Authors should disclose recent, relevant unpublished work when submitting a manuscript. For example, authors should give code numbers of related manuscripts that are under consideration by a Physical Review journal, the title of a manuscript that is submitted elsewhere, or the e-print number of a manuscript deposited on a preprint server.

Reproduction of previously published figures, tables, and text. Reproductions should be kept to a minimum and must be properly referenced and comply with the copyright or licensing requirements for that material. Prior to publication, authors must show that they have complied with those requirements, possibly including written agreement of both publisher and author of the originally published work. For items reproduced from APS journals, no permission is required. For other sources, if the reproduced item was NOT published with a CC BY or CC0 open access Creative Commons license, permission should be sought. Note that some items may be held under a different copyright than the paper itself, which would be noted in a credit or caption.

Transfers Between Journals

The Physical Review portfolio provides many publishing options and welcomes the transfer of a manuscript between journals. If a manuscript is not suitable for publication at a given Physical Review journal, the editors aim to support authors by suggesting another journal or journals, provided a suitable option exists.

Transfers are considered resubmissions. Authors who wish to transfer their original manuscript should access it on the Submissions Server and resubmit to the new journal. The editors of the receiving journal will make their own editorial decisions about the transferred manuscript. When a manuscript is transferred between Physical Review journals its history is fully available to the new journal. This history includes all correspondence between authors, editors, and referees.

When transferring from one Physical Review journal to another, authors should submit a rebuttal to referees, when appropriate, along with the possibly revised manuscript.

Questions about the suitability of a manuscript for a given Physical Review journal should be directed to the editors of that journal (see Contact Information).

References to Other Work

Readers benefit from complete referencing that communicates the precedents, sources, and context of the reported work. Authors should follow these guidelines when submitting or resubmitting a paper:

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material (SM) is useful information that is not essential to understanding an article’s main results, such as multimedia, raw or analyzed data, parameters used in or produced by calculations, and computer codes as well as additional technical details on the work performed. All Physical Review journals provide a platform for Supplemental Material deposited as electronic files. For editorial policies and details about preparing Supplemental Material, see Supplemental Material Instructions.

Peer Review

Purpose of Peer Review

Peer Review Procedure

Selecting Peer Reviewers

Confidentiality of Peer Review Materials

Appeals

Purpose of Peer Review

Rigorous, fair, and equitable peer review is integral to advancing science. Peer review ensures that submitted manuscripts meet the highest standards of validity, novelty, importance, and quality of presentation.

The peer review process is directed by a team of staff editors employed by APS and active scientists (academic editors), who are ultimately responsible for any decisions regarding publication of articles in our journals. The editors are advised by experts in the field serving as referees and by members of the Editorial Board.

Peer Review Procedure

The following summary is general to all Physical Review journals. Individual journals may have specific peer-review models and processes that are detailed in their Information for Authors.

Internal review. The editors may conclude that a submitted manuscript is unlikely to move further in the review process on the basis of the journal’s criteria and can issue a rejection without external review. Such decisions, known as desk rejections, allow authors to seek alternative publication options with minimal delay.

External review. When a manuscript is deemed suitable for review, the editors select a number of experts in the research area and ask for an advisory opinion in the form of a report. Reports provide advice to authors on improving the manuscript and to editors on the suitability of publication in the journal.

Resubmission. Editors may invite authors to resubmit a revised manuscript that addresses the referees’ comments. Upon resubmission, authors are encouraged to provide a point-by-point rebuttal to the points raised by the referees, a version of the manuscript in which changes are suitably marked, and a list of changes made to the manuscript. In the rebuttal to the referees, authors should be succinct, yet thorough.

Final decision. The review process concludes when the editors have sufficient information to make a decision. The editors will then send a decision letter with the reports and, if applicable, suitable instructions on how to proceed further. Editors share reviewer reports as they were written, providing context and guidance where needed. Exceptions include edits to correct grammatical errors, preserve anonymity, or remove disrespectful language. Editors may also revise a report in consultation with reviewers to improve clarity or tone before the report is sent to the authors. There may be instances in which referees also provide comments that are solely intended as advice for editors and may be held confidential.

In all communications, language should be respectful and collegial. Editors reserve the right to take action against derogatory or demeaning language. (See also Editorial: Promoting Inclusive and Respectful Communications.)

Our Editorial teams are committed to providing quality and productive peer review that strives to arrive at a final decision within two rounds of review.

Selecting Peer Reviewers

Editors select peer reviewers (or “referees”) based on topical expertise, as related to the manuscript. Referee identities are confidential but are shared with Editorial Board members in appeal cases (see Appeals). Reviewers should avoid disclosing their identities to authors unless they have discussed this option with the editors.

Authors are encouraged to suggest suitable reviewers. They may also inform editors of experts who have a potential conflict of interest and who might provide a biased recommendation. However, the editors are not bound by these suggestions and will exercise their best judgment.

Confidentiality of Peer Review Materials

Referees are expected to treat all materials associated with the review process as confidential. This includes the manuscript itself, any Supplementary Material, any reference material, all referee reports, authors’ responses, and editorial letters.

Referees may not use any material provided to them as part of the peer review process for their own research. Referees may share these materials with a colleague whom they invite to write a joint report, who would then be subject to the same expectations of confidentiality and conduct as the original referee. The name and contact information of any individual who helped write the report must be disclosed to the editors when a report is submitted. When you invite another expert to collaborate on the report, all parties should be mindful of potential conflicts of interest.

In general, all peer review materials are confidential and access for a given manuscript is restricted to the authors, referees, and editors throughout the peer review process. Requests for additional access to peer review materials should be sent to APS Help. APS will consider the purposes of the research, the qualifications of the researchers, and the cost of making the material available, among other factors.

An Open Reports pilot in which details about the peer review process are published alongside published articles is currently underway at PRX Energy. For more details, see PRX Energy Open Reports Pilot.

Appeals

Authors of manuscripts rejected, with or without external review, may appeal the decision to a journal’s Editorial Board. Authors should contact the journal before initiating an appeal in order to discuss all options available.

Purpose of an Appeal. An appeal is not an additional round of peer review. Instead, Board Members assess whether the editors reached an appropriate decision given the journal’s scope, criteria, and any expert reports.

Appeals process. Authors should address a letter to the journal that succinctly lays out the reasons for contesting the decision in collegial and scholarly terms. The editors will send the letter, the previous correspondence, and referee identities to an appropriate Editorial Board member. In the absence of a suitable Editorial Board member, the editors will appoint an appropriate expert as an ad hoc Board member.

The Editorial Board member will review the full correspondence and provide an advisory opinion to the editors. The editors will send the authors a final decision that includes the signed opinion of the Editorial Board member. This decision concludes the scientific evaluation of the manuscript.

Procedural Appeals. Authors of manuscripts rejected after an appeal to the Editorial Board may request to have the APS Executive Editor review the case. This request should be addressed to the journal editors, who will forward the case history to the Executive Editor. The Executive Editor evaluates whether the journal editors adhered to the Physical Review policies and practices and whether the paper received a fair hearing. The decision of the Executive Editor is final and cannot be contested further.

Ethics and Research Integrity

Ethics and Conduct Responsibilities of Editors and Referees

Ethics and Conduct Responsibilities of Authors

Misconduct

Reproducibility

Data Availability

Research Involving Human or Animal Subjects

Dual Use Research

Use of AI-Based Writing Tools

Results reported in the Physical Review journals must be reliable and trustworthy to ensure further scientific progress.

The Physical Review aligns its guidelines for ethics and research integrity with the APS Guidelines on Ethics, providing additional details or policy where needed. To report a potential ethics violation in a submitted or published paper in the Physical Review journals, contact APS Help. Depending on the severity of the complaint, the allegations may be handled by Physical Review’s Head of Ethics and Research Integrity and may involve informing and working with the relevant institutions.

APS is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which has clear guidelines in place for editors when confronted with misconduct. If you suspect misconduct in a paper you are reviewing, please inform the journal promptly. Evidence that a published paper is based on fraudulent results, is plagiarized, or contains inappropriately manipulated images or figures can result in the publication of an Expression of Concern or a Retraction.

Ethics and Conduct Responsibilities of Editors and Referees

Referees must disclose any conflicts of interest (real or perceived) relevant to the publication process to the editors. These include having a direct competitive, collaborative, financial, or any other relationship with the author or authors that could affect the evaluation of the manuscript.

Editors and Editorial Board Members must also be mindful of their own possible conflicts of interest (real or perceived), and should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where there is a suspicion of conflict, for similar reasons as those listed for referees above.

It is an ethical breach for referees, editors, or anyone else consulted during the review process to use materials shared with them for any purpose other than evaluating the manuscript. Making use of confidential information in this way provides an unfair advantage, and undermines the peer review process.

Ethics and Conduct Responsibilities of Authors

Authors should alert editors to any potential conflict of interest such as sources of funding, condition of employment, and any limitations on disclosure of data, code, or experimental details that would complicate or prevent the replication of the study. Authors are encouraged to declare any conflict of interest within the paper itself using a Conflict of Interest statement.

Misconduct

Data fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism corrupt the scientific literature, undermining the value and public trust of science. Evidence for these forms of misconduct can lead to the retraction of a paper, the publication of an Expression of Concern or other corrections.

Data fabrication is the generation of data through a process other than that which is described in the manuscript.

Data falsification includes passing off data as something other than what is being presented.

Omission of data that does not fit the desired conclusions or scientific case is another form of unacceptable data manipulation.

Plagiarism is the presentation of data and results obtained by others as if they were your own. Plagiarism also includes unacceptable levels of reuse of one’s own work without attribution, even when summarizing past results or background material. Direct quotations may be used when appropriate with a citation to the original source.

Reproducibility

A scientific article should include all relevant details a fellow researcher of reasonable skill would need to reproduce the work and verify the results. Referees assess reproducibility as part of the peer review process. Deliberately concealing details necessary for reproducibility studies runs counter to the APS core value of adherence to the scientific method, as well as the values of truth and integrity.

Data Availability

The Physical Review journals strongly encourage authors to share their data.

Sharing data supports the independent verification of findings, allows further analysis of valuable research data, and helps ensure transparency and trust in the published literature. Data should be publicly available at the time of publication where possible. However, embargoes on data sharing are permitted if necessary, such as to respect privacy or trade secrets.

Data availability statements help readers access available data.

Research Involving Human or Animal Subjects

Research involving experiments with human or animal subjects should conform to the ethical standards outlined in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. The relevant section is II.F., Protection of Human Participants.

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the ethical principles outlined in the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. When applicable, institutional review board approval should be indicated in the manuscript. Also, the manuscript should describe the manner in which informed consent was obtained from any human subjects. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals were followed.

Dual Use Research

Research that expands knowledge or advances applications can also have harmful effects to society. Even if these negative effects are unintentional, editors must weigh the potential harm caused by publishing a given research article. In the event that the sole reason for rejecting a paper is its potentially harmful societal effects, a journal’s editors will consult with their Editorial Board and APS Editorial Leadership to ensure a balanced perspective.

Appropriate Use of AI Tools

Large Language Models, such as ChatGPT, are rapidly evolving, and the Physical Review journals continue to observe their uses in creating and modifying text. Authors and Referees may use AI-based writing tools exclusively to polish, condense, or otherwise lightly edit their writing. As always, authors must take full responsibility for the contents of their manuscripts; similarly, referees must take full responsibility for the contents of their reports. Additional guidelines can be found at Appropriate Use of AI Tools.

Post Publication

Corrections

Name Change Policy

Comments

Errata

Expressions of Concern

Retractions

Corrections

Authors may request to correct self-contained errors in papers published within the past year. The changes are subject to approval by a journal’s editors, who will evaluate the significance of the change on the accuracy of scientific statements, on funding information, or on metadata (such as an author’s name).

Corrections will be described briefly and listed by date in the electronic version of the paper. This information will also appear at the end of the PDF version, following the references. Where applicable, the print version will be corrected if timing allows.

Corrections should only address issues that were known at the time of publication. They should not update information that changes following publication, such as author contact information or publication of references. To request a correction, authors should contact the relevant journal directly.

Changes to the Supplemental Material after publication are also subject to editorial discretion but are handled separately. See Supplemental Material Instructions.

Name Change Policy

APS allows authors who have published research in the Physical Review journals to alter or update their published names and/or personal pronouns for any reason. These changes will be made to the electronic and PDF versions of all published papers in the Physical Review journals requested by the author. In most cases, authors can request changes to papers published as far back as the year 2000. Names in the reference list can also be changed, provided those articles have already been updated. See APS Name Change Policy. Name changes and metadata corrections are reflected in Cross Mark, indexing services, and Google Scholar.

Comments

Readers may submit a critique or correction of a previously published article by other authors in the form of a Comment. Comments must appear in the same journal as the paper it critiques.

The opening paragraph should clearly indicate both the article to which the Comment is directed and the criticism. To be considered for publication, a Comment must be written in a collegial tone (free from polemics) and must be pertinent. While Comments may criticize the work, they should not criticize the work’s authors. Comments should not reiterate previously published disagreements. A Reply to a Comment must also conform to these requirements. A Reply should not solely restate information in the original paper. A Comment and Reply are crosslinked on the website.

All published Comments are peer reviewed.

Errata

Errata notify readers about errors or omissions in previously published papers. The standard Erratum is a statement by the authors of the original paper that briefly describes the correction(s) and, where appropriate, any effects on the conclusions of the paper.

Besides standard Errata, other notices may appear in this section, as described below. Each has bidirectional links between the original article and the notice in the Errata section. The category of the corrective notice is indicated in its title and in the link from the original article.

Expressions of Concern

An Expression of Concern raises awareness about a possible problem in a paper. It is used when an issue with the paper has been brought to the attention of the editors and when a possible resolution takes a long time or no resolution of the issue is possible. An Expression of Concern requires approval from the Executive Editor.

Retractions

A Retraction is a notice that the paper should not be regarded as part of the scientific literature. Possible reasons for this include, among others, presentation of invalid results and inclusion of results that were published previously in substantially similar form. (In the latter case, the prior publication, not the retracted article, should be regarded as the source of the information.)

To protect the integrity of the record, the retracted article remains online with a clear notice of retraction. Retractions are sometimes published by the authors when they have discovered substantial scientific errors; in other cases, the editors conclude that Retraction is appropriate. In all cases, the Retraction indicates the reason for the action and who is responsible for the decision. The word RETRACTION is also added to the title of the retracted article.

A Retraction made without the unanimous agreement of the authors requires approval by the Executive Editor.

Open Access and Publications Rights

Open Access and Transformative Agreements

Support for Researchers from Lower-Income Countries

Article Publication Charges (APCs)

Publication Rights and Copyright

Funder Compliance and Article Deposition

Open Access and Transformative Agreements

APS offers a range of open access and transformative agreements. Such agreements facilitate the open access publication of articles submitted by authors affiliated with participating research institutions, usually without cost to authors.

Find more information and a list of our agreements.

Support for Researchers from Lower-Income Countries

Access to the full range of APS journals and their archives is available through Research4Life for over 100 lower-income countries and territories around the world.

APS also has an open access program that enables authors in these same regions to publish their research open access without cost.

For full information on eligibility for both of these initiatives and how to take advantage of them please visit our support page.

Article Publication Charges (APCs)

APS aims to offer open access options for the Physical Review journals that meet the needs of all authors across the research communities it serves. Review details about current APC pricing for publishing gold open access in hybrid and fully open access Physical Review journals.

To publish a manuscript, APS must ensure that it has obtained all the necessary rights. In the majority of cases the standard APS Transfer of Copyright agreement completed by the Corresponding Author will continue to be sufficient. If, however, one or more authors are employed by a government agency or the authors choose an Open Access publication option a separate ‘license to publish’ agreement may also/instead be required. To help manage this process, APS provides an online, interactive service that guides the completion of the agreement(s) appropriate for any given manuscript. Authors will be directed, via email, to this service after their manuscript has been accepted for publication. Authors should be aware that accepted manuscripts will not be prepared for publication (copyedited or formatted) until APS is in receipt of all the agreement(s) associated with them.

See details on Publication Rights.

Funder Compliance and Article Deposition

Gold Open Access

Publishing in the Physical Review journals that are gold open access with a CC-BY license enables researchers to comply with most – if not all – of the current open access policies of funders.

APS’ open access agreements use a CC-BY license by default and are compliant with funder requirements. Gold open access articles may be deposited at any time in any repository in line with the CC-BY license, and may also be the version of record.

Green Open Access

For all subscription articles for which APS holds copyright, authors have the right to post and update the article on free-access e-print servers (repositories, including institutional and subject specific such as the arXiv) as long as the version of record prepared and/or formatted by APS or its vendors are not used for that purpose, and the APS copyright is clear. All article depositions should include a link/DOI to the published manuscript.

Depositing an article in this way is compliant with many funder policies around the world including in the USA.

Rights Retention Policies

Authors seeking to utilize a Rights Retention approach with CC-BY license on the accepted manuscript will need to publish their article as gold open access, which is a sustainable way towards publishing open access.

Note that as part of the APS copyright agreement, authors retain all other proprietary rights, including patent rights. Copyright is required for sustainable publication to ensure APS can maintain the scholarly record. The green route described above is supported by journal subscriptions, and applying a CC-BY license to such articles does not support this.

Please visit the appropriate journal-specific page:

The following policies govern the use of APS Journal accounts which will be used for PROLA member subscribers and subscribers of APS-managed email alerts.

All Physical Review journals, including Reviews of Modern Physics, follow a common set of Editorial Policies and Practices.

Sign in to APS Journals Find your institution Examples: Science Academy, sue@uni.ac.uk, London. Accessibility Privacy