中文簡(jiǎn)介

當(dāng)代物理學(xué)雜志(亞美尼亞科學(xué)院)是一本涵蓋現(xiàn)代物理學(xué)所有領(lǐng)域的雜志。它發(fā)布重大貢獻(xiàn)等理論和應(yīng)用科學(xué)領(lǐng)域的基本粒子的相互作用在超高的能量,基本粒子物理、帶電粒子與物質(zhì)的相互作用,半導(dǎo)體和半導(dǎo)體器件物理,凝聚態(tài)物理學(xué)、放射物理學(xué)和無(wú)線電電子學(xué)、光學(xué)和量子電子學(xué),量子尺寸效應(yīng),納米物理學(xué),sensorics,超導(dǎo)性。同行評(píng)審《當(dāng)代物理學(xué)雜志》是同行評(píng)議的期刊。我們使用雙盲同行評(píng)審格式。我們的審稿人團(tuán)隊(duì)包括超過(guò)50名審稿人，包括內(nèi)部審稿人和外部審稿人(80%)。2017年從提交到首次評(píng)審的平均周期為15天，從首次評(píng)審到驗(yàn)收的平均周期為30天。接受發(fā)表文章的最終決定由編輯委員會(huì)作出。被邀請(qǐng)的審稿人因利益沖突，認(rèn)為不符合審稿條件或者不能審稿的，應(yīng)當(dāng)及時(shí)通知審稿人，并予以拒絕。審稿人應(yīng)以一種合理合理的方式清晰地闡述自己的觀點(diǎn)，這樣作者才能利用審稿人的觀點(diǎn)來(lái)完善稿件。必須避免對(duì)作者的個(gè)人批評(píng)。評(píng)論者應(yīng)該顯示發(fā)表的一篇評(píng)論(我)任何相關(guān)的工作沒(méi)有被引用的作者,(2)任何已報(bào)道在以前的出版物和沒(méi)有適當(dāng)?shù)膮⒖蓟蛞?(2)任何實(shí)質(zhì)性相似或重疊與其他手稿(發(fā)表或未發(fā)表)的個(gè)人知識(shí)。

投稿網(wǎng)址：https://www.springer.com/physics/particle+and+nuclear+physics/journal/11958

英文簡(jiǎn)介

Journal of Contemporary Physics (Armenian Academy of Sciences) is a journal that covers all fields of modern physics. It publishes significant contributions in such areas of theoretical and applied science as interaction of elementary particles at superhigh energies, elementary particle physics, charged particle interactions with matter, physics of semiconductors and semiconductor devices, physics of condensed matter, radiophysics and radioelectronics, optics and quantum electronics, quantum size effects, nanophysics, sensorics, and superconductivity.PEER REVIEWJournal of Contemporary Physics is a peer reviewed journal. We use a double blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes over 50 reviewers, both internal and external (80%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 15 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30 days. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.