Peer-review policy

This policy outlines the general principles of peer-review operated on Laser Physics, published by IOP Publishing on behalf of Astro Ltd.

The journal adheres to a strict ethical policy, which the journal staff, editors, authors and referees are expected to maintain for integrity. See the IOP ethical policy for more information.

General principles

Unbiased consideration is given to all articles offered for publication regardless of the race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, political philosophy, sexual orientation, age or reputation of the authors.

The journal is international in authorship and in readership, and referees are carefully selected from the international research community. Referees' names are kept confidential and may only be disclosed to journal Editorial Board members, who are also instructed to maintain confidentiality. We ask that referees do not transmit their report directly to the authors nor to disclose their identity to the authors or discuss the paper they have reviewed with colleagues unless it has been published.

Information and ideas obtained as a referee must be kept confidential and not used for competitive advantage, and referees should immediately disclose any conflicts of interest to the editors. Referees should inform the journal if they are unable to review a paper and should not delay the peer-review process unnecessarily, either deliberately or inadvertently.

Referees are expected to judge objectively the quality of the research reported, give fair, frank and constructive criticism and refrain from personal criticism of the authors.

Authors must not fabricate, falsify or misrepresent data or results. Authors must be honest in making claims for the results and conclusions of their research.

Authors should acknowledge the work of others used in their research and only cite publications that have influenced the direction and course of their study. Excessive self-citation must be avoided. Referees are expected to point out relevant work that has not been cited, and use citations to explain where elements of the work have been previously reported. Biased citation of literature is unacceptable.

Authors must not publish articles describing essentially the same studies or results in more than one primary research journal, or submit the same article concurrently to more than one journal. Referees should note any substantial similarity between the article and any paper published in or submitted to another journal.

When published, an article will receive a receipt date corresponding to the date when the article was first received by the editors.

Peer-review procedure

Articles submitted for publication, if they satisfy the requirements of the journal, are generally sent to two independent referees who are asked to report on the scientific quality and originality of the work as well as its presentation.

We are committed to publishing only high-quality material. Articles which referees or editors deem to be technically sound, but of little interest, will usually be rejected.

If there is sufficient agreement between the referees,

  • the article may be accepted;
  • the referees' reports may be sent to the authors for amendment or revision of the article;
  • the article may be rejected; or
  • if the article contains too many errors for the referees to comment fully on the scientific content, the authors will be asked to make major revisions and then resubmit the article.

Revised articles
When authors make revisions to their article in response to the referees' comments they are asked to submit a list of changes and any replies for transmission to the referees. The revised version may be returned to the original referees who are then asked whether the revisions have been carried out satisfactorily. If the referees remain dissatisfied, the article will be considered by the Editorial Board.

Use of an adjudicator
For the cases when referees' reports are not in agreement, the paper and the referees' reports may be sent to an adjudicator who is asked first to form his or her own opinion of the paper and then to read the referees' reports and adjudicate between them.

Appeals
In the case of rejection, any appeal that the authors submit in response to the referees' reports will be considered by the Editorial Board and a revised version will be considered only if the Board thinks it appropriate.