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.
*****************************************************************

 Referee:

 Manuscript Number:

 Author:

 Title:

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:
NOTE: IF YOU ARE RECOMMENDING PUBLICATION IN PRL, PLEASE
PROVIDE, IN YOUR REPORT, A SEPARATE STATEMENT AS TO WHY THIS
PAPER IS APPROPRIATE SPECIFICALLY FOR PRL.

a) The paper should be published in PRL as it is. . . . . (  )
b) The paper should be published in PRL after minor revisions are made, without further review.    . . . . (  )
c) The paper, with revisions and further review, might be publishable in PRL.                   . . . . (  )
d) The paper with extensive revisions, and further review could possibly be published in PRL.     . . . . (  )
e) The paper should not be published in PRL.      . . . . (  )


IV. Would you be willing to review the paper again? ( )yes ( )no

If not could you suggest alternative referees?



V.  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 (  )

*****************************************************************
begin_report (use as much space as is needed):


end_report
*****************************************************************
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 ============================

=======================================================================

********  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.  Please use as much space as needed to INCLUDE YOUR REPORT, and (if applicable) to make a positive recommendation to publish in a particular Physical Review journal (A, B, C, D, or E). Only your report, not your other responses, will be returned to the authors.

====================================================================
EXPLANATORY NOTES: (please enter your responses above, not here):

1.  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 more than one alternate reviewer.  (NOTE: This is usually only relevant after the first round of review, because the anonymous review process is normally restricted to two referrals.)

2:  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 below).

3:  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.

4:  A recommendation to publish in Physical Review should be made in a POSITIVE statement of justification addressed to the Editors, Physical Review.  In particular, for accelerated publication as a Rapid Communication, the statement should
    demonstrate that the work meets the journal's criteria, a statement of which is included in the complete Referral Form.
=========================================================================