中文簡(jiǎn)介

理論與數(shù)學(xué)物理包括量子場(chǎng)論和基本粒子理論，核物理的基本問題，多體問題和統(tǒng)計(jì)物理，非相對(duì)論量子力學(xué)，引力理論的基本問題。文章報(bào)道了理論物理的最新發(fā)展以及相關(guān)的數(shù)學(xué)問題。《理論與數(shù)學(xué)物理》與俄羅斯科學(xué)院斯特克洛夫數(shù)學(xué)研究所合作出版。同行評(píng)審《理論與數(shù)學(xué)物理》是一本同行評(píng)議期刊。我們使用單盲同行評(píng)審格式，在出現(xiàn)問題時(shí)使用雙盲或多盲形式。我們的評(píng)審團(tuán)隊(duì)包括來自多個(gè)國家(意大利、巴西、英國、法國、美國等)的270多名國內(nèi)外評(píng)審人員(83%)。2017年從提交到首次評(píng)審的平均周期為3天，從首次評(píng)審到驗(yàn)收的平均周期為80天。2017年投稿退稿率為48%。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)的工作沒有被引用的作者,(2)任何已報(bào)道在以前的出版物和沒有適當(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：http://www.mathnet.ru/php/esubmission.phtml?jrnid=tmf&wshow=snote&option_lang=eng

英文簡(jiǎn)介

Theoretical and Mathematical Physics covers quantum field theory and theory of elementary particles, fundamental problems of nuclear physics, many-body problems and statistical physics, nonrelativistic quantum mechanics, and basic problems of gravitation theory. Articles report on current developments in theoretical physics as well as related mathematical problems. Theoretical and Mathematical Physics is published in collaboration with the Steklov Mathematical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences.PEER REVIEWTheoretical and Mathematical Physics is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format, double or more blind in cases of problems. Our team of reviewers includes over 270 reviewers, both internal and external (83%), from many countries (Italy, Brazil, UK, France, USA, etc.). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 3 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 80 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 48%. 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.