JETP Letters是一份國(guó)際同行評(píng)議期刊，用于快速出版描述從固體到基本粒子物理各個(gè)領(lǐng)域的基本理論和實(shí)驗(yàn)研究的短通信。該雜志每年有24期，歡迎所有國(guó)家的英文或俄文手稿。主題實(shí)驗(yàn)和理論物理的所有主題包括引力、場(chǎng)論、基本粒子和原子核、等離子體、非線性現(xiàn)象、凝聚態(tài)、超導(dǎo)性、超流體、激光和表面。同行評(píng)審JETP Letters是一份同行評(píng)議的期刊。我們使用單一的盲同行評(píng)審格式。我們的審稿人團(tuán)隊(duì)包括來(lái)自6個(gè)國(guó)家的60多名審稿人，其中80%來(lái)自國(guó)內(nèi)外。2017年從提交到首次評(píng)審的平均周期為10天，從首次評(píng)審到驗(yàn)收的平均周期為18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)。

JETP Letters is an international peer reviewed journal for rapid publication of short communications describing the basic theoretical and experimental research in all fields of physics from solid state to elementary particles. The journal has 24 issues per year and welcomes manuscripts from all countries in the English or Russian language.TOPICS COVEREDAll topics of experimental and theoretical physics including gravitation, field theory, elementary particles and nuclei, plasma, nonlinear phenomena, condensed matter, superconductivity, superfluidity, lasers, and surfaces.PEER REVIEWJETP Letters is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes over 60 reviewers, both internal and external (80%), from 6 countries. The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 10 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 18 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appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.