referral-prl 01/03 Physical Review Letters - REFEREE RESPONSE FORM (See below for instructions, and, if necessary, please visit http://prl.aps.org/referees.html for more detailed information.) NOTE TO REFEREE: If you are not familiar with this form and its use, please skip down to "======= cut here =======" for instructions and information. This form is to assist the Editors and is not a substitute for your written report. It may be useful, however, as an outline for your report, which should explain why the paper does, or does not, meet our criteria. ***************************************************************** Manuscript Code: Title: Author: Date: Referee: I. Letters published in PRL must meet a high standard of importance and interest. a) Please judge the importance of the paper to its specific field. not important ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) very important b) Please judge the broad interest of the paper, apart from from its importance to its specific field, to a wide spectrum of physicists. not interesting ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) very interesting c) Please judge the validity of the paper. probably not valid ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) probably valid II. A Letter should have an introduction and conclusion that explains, in terms accessible to a broad audience, the physics context of the work: why it is important and what has been accomplished. Please judge the introduction and conclusion. not accessible ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) very accessible III. Recommendation: ( ) The paper should be published in PRL as it is. ( ) The paper should be published in PRL after minor revisions are made, without further review. ( ) The paper, with revisions and further review, might be publishable in PRL. ( ) The paper with extensive revisions, and further review could possibly be published in PRL. ( ) The paper should not be published in PRL. NOTE: iF YOU RECOMMEND THIS PAPER FOR PRL, PLEASE EXPLAIN IN YOUR REPORT WHY IT MERITS PUBLICATION IN PRL INSTEAD OF A SPECIALIZED JOURNAL. IV. Would you be willing to review the paper again? ( )yes ( )no If not could you suggest alternative referees? V. Comments for the PRL editor: (Comments for authors go in the report) **************************************************************************** begin_report (use as much space as is needed): end_report **************************************************************************** VI. Recommendation for Physical Review: A recommendation to publish in Physical Review may be made, but should not be used to soften a rejection from PRL. It should be made separately, in a detailed statement to the Physical Review editor. Please take account of their publication criteria which require that papers "significantly advance physics" and be "important to the field." The paper could be considered by the Physical Review as a Rapid Communication ( ) no revision ( ) Regular Article ( ) with minor revision ( ) Brief Report ( ) major revision ( ) Statement to Editor of Physical Review A, B, C, D, or E in support of recommendation in item V (if applicable) (use as much space as is needed): ============================== cut here ================================ PLEASE RETURN YOUR ENTIRE RESPONSE (this form, your referee report, and if applicable your recommendation to Physical Review) AS ONE FILE to the email address: prl@aps.org --- Give as the subject "Report" followed by your last name in upper case, the manuscript code number, and the last name of the first author; for example, "Report BROWN LA1234 Smith". If you do not receive an acknowledgment within one working day, please repeat the message or send the report via another mode. Do not automatically follow an electronic-mail report with a backup by conventional mail. Thank you for your help. **** INSTRUCTIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR REFEREES **** The form above is addressed to the editors and intended to assist them in reaching a timely decision on the disposition of the manuscript. THIS FORM IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR YOUR REPORT. Please answer only those questions which are applicable by inserting an X in the parentheses. Please use as much space as needed to INCLUDE YOUR REPORT, and (if applicable) to make a statement to the Editor of Physical Review A, B, C, D, or E. Only your report, not your other responses, will be sent to the authors. ================================================================= EXPLANATORY NOTES: (please enter your responses above, not here): 1. The PRL acceptance criteria of scientific validity, special importance, and broad interest are described in the "Advice to Referees", part of the complete Referral Form (see the URL above). 2. Because PRL covers all of physics, our readers cannot be expected to understand the jargon of a particular subfield. Are the title, abstract, and introduction properly addressed to our general readership? If not, you may wish to include in your report some suggestions on how the authors might improve their manuscript. 3. If you do not recommend acceptance of the manuscript in its present form, and if further review is necessary, please indicate whether you are willing to review again. If not, please offer suggestions for alternate reviewers (preferably, more than one). (NOTE: This is usually only relevant after the first round of review, because the anonymous review process is normally restricted to two referrals.) 4. A recommendation to publish in Physical Review may be made, but should not be used to soften a rejection from PRL. Such a recommendation should be made separately, in a detailed statement to the Physical Review editor. If you make such a recommendation, please take account of the APS Council statement on publication criteria, requiring that papers "significantly advance physics" and be "important to the field." A detailed description of the different sections of Physical Review (Rapid Communications, Regular Articles, Brief Reports) appears in the complete Referral Form.