How to Publish Your PhD Research in Physics Journals

Publishing your Ph.D. research in physics journals

At this stage you are well into your Ph.D. research and may already be producing new results. This chapter covers an important but often under-taught part of graduate work: publicizing your research. Graduate curricula rarely include systematic instruction on how to publish, yet publishing is central to a physicist’s career.

Two main ways to publicize research

Physicists typically publicize their work in two major ways: journal publications and presentations at conferences. This chapter focuses on journal publications; conference presentations are covered in the next chapter.

Which journals matter?

There are hundreds of journals that accept physics papers, and many specialize in particular subfields. Three highly prestigious, general outlets often mentioned in physics contexts are Nature, Science, and Physical Review Letters (PRL).

Nature and Science publish across the sciences and are extremely selective. A common criterion is broad interest and significance beyond a single subfield; editors favor results with wide appeal (for example, first observations of a new phenomenon). Manuscripts are often screened by editors and—if they do not meet that bar—rejected before referee review.

Physical Review Letters publishes exclusively physics and physics-related work and therefore handles many more physics papers than Nature or Science. PRL remains highly selective; editors scrutinize submissions and may limit what is sent to referees. PRL also enforces a strict page limit (typically four typeset pages), so authors must present results concisely.

Decide the single most important message

Before writing, be very clear about the single, most important message you want to convey. Discuss and agree on that message with your adviser and collaborators. Decide which results, data, and figures are essential to make that point convincingly. If your main result is buried in a confusing presentation, reviewers and readers may miss it—which often leads to rejection.

Choosing the target journal and using templates

Often your adviser and collaborators will have a target journal in mind based on the significance of the work. Once you have a target, visit the journal website and read the authors’ instructions. Many journals provide templates that show how the final typeset paper will look—this helps you judge the final length and whether your figures and text fit page limits (important for PRL).

If you are already familiar with relevant journals from the literature search you did when learning the field, look at recent papers in your target journal to see how authors present material. Emulating successful structure and style from the target journal helps your manuscript meet expectations.

Writing the manuscript

If you performed the bulk of the work, you will most likely write the first draft. Standard components include an abstract, an introduction, the body (methods/results), and a conclusion or summary—useful even if the journal style does not require explicit section headings.

Expect multiple iterations: the manuscript will go through several rounds of revision as coauthors provide feedback. Different readers prefer different phrasing and emphasis; discuss choices (for example, why say “this result is consistent with…” instead of “this result proves that…”). Learning which phrases trigger reviewer objections comes with experience.

It is common for one person to draft the manuscript and then circulate it for revisions rather than splitting writing by sections. A single-drafter approach often produces a more coherent paper than a patchwork of styles.

Figures and visual clarity

Physics papers typically include figures—especially graphs. Use good graphing software and remember that figures will be reduced in print. Make sure axis labels, legends, and annotations remain legible at final size. If you use the journal template and place figures in the layout, you can preview how they will appear in the printed version and adjust for clutter or small text.

Keep figures as simple and clear as possible so that readers unfamiliar with your work can readily see the point. Brevity and clarity are crucial.

References and literature awareness

Unless you are claiming a completely novel discovery, your paper will include references. Follow the journal’s citation format and, more importantly, ensure you have not omitted relevant prior work. Your adviser can help identify key citations. If you leave out an obvious prior result, referees in the field will notice, and this can create bad impressions or lead to negative reviews.

Authorship

Decisions about author order are typically made by your supervisor/adviser. In most cases, the person who did the most work and wrote the manuscript is listed first. Practices vary by field and group, and sometimes politics influence ordering. Be aware of your group’s conventions.

Note: In large experimental high-energy physics collaborations, author lists can be very large (often hundreds). In those cases authors are frequently listed alphabetically by last name.

Formatting and LaTeX

Learn LaTeX—most physics journals, particularly the Physical Review journals, prefer LaTeX source for submissions. Figures are often required in PostScript (PS) or Encapsulated PostScript (EPS) formats. Several graphical TeX editors and conversion tools (for example, MathType can export LaTeX from Word equations) can ease the transition. Submitting in the preferred format can also reduce publication fees for some journals.

Submission process and tracking

When the manuscript is ready, submit electronically via the journal’s submission system. After submission you will receive a manuscript or submission code—use this for all future correspondence. Editors will screen the manuscript and, if it satisfies basic standards, send it out for peer review. For highly selective journals (Nature, Science, PRL) two referees are typical, three is common, and four or five reviewers are not unheard of.

Referees are anonymous. Many journals provide an online author portal to track where your manuscript is in the editorial process—whether it is with the editor, sent to referees, or has referee reports returned.

Typical referee outcomes and how to respond

The referee reports will determine the next step. Typical outcomes include:

1. Acceptance with minor revisions: All referees recommend publication. You may need to make small corrections; the editors will instruct you on next steps. This is a good outcome but relatively uncommon on the first round.
2. Mixed reviews (major revision requested): One referee may be positive while another raises substantive concerns. You will usually be invited to submit a revised manuscript and a point-by-point rebuttal addressing reviewers’ comments. Make a serious effort to accommodate reasonable suggestions—this demonstrates respect for the refereeing process and often smooths subsequent rounds of review. In many cases the same referees re-evaluate the revision.
3. Rejection: If all referees recommend rejection on the first round, the editor will typically reject the manuscript. You can appeal or submit a rebuttal, but if referees uniformly oppose publication, success is unlikely. In that case, revise the manuscript and submit it to another journal.

Some journals (for example, Physical Review journals) allow appeals to an associate editor in contested cases, but appeals should be used only when you have a strong, documented reason.

Why publishing matters for your career

Publishing is a necessary part of a physicist’s career. Many graduate students accumulate a series of publications during their Ph.D. Your adviser should help ensure you have at least a few publications by graduation—this strengthens your credentials for postdoctoral positions or employment. You should not be fully satisfied with graduate work until you have at least one published paper to your name.

For an overview of career steps, see the related chapter on becoming a physicist: Become a physicist.