The Editor-in-Chief, supported by the Associate Editors, is responsible for the content and other editorial matters related to the journal.
The Review Process
Submitted manuscripts are initially screened by the Editor-in-Chief. If the manuscript appears to be suitable for the journal, it will be assigned to an Associate Editor who has the appropriate scientific expertise to determine whether to send the manuscript to be peer reviewed. The editors may seek informal advice from members of the Advisory Board. The goal is to assess early if the manuscript should be sent for formal review. Those papers judged by the editors to be of insufficient general interest, or otherwise inappropriate, are rejected promptly without external review. At this stage, editors also evaluate the possible suitability of the manuscript for other journals in the AIPP portfolio and may recommend the paper for one of these journals.
Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are sent for formal review. Typically, two independent referees are carefully selected from the worldwide research community and AQS relies on single-blind peer-review. The Editorial team welcomes authors’ suggestions of appropriate reviewers and gives serious consideration to requests that a manuscript not be sent to a particular reviewer. In both cases, we regard these suggestions as recommendations only.
The referees comment critically on the validity and importance of the paper and provide their opinion concerning the novelty, impact, and interest to the readers. Referee reports are intended to advise the editors. When necessary, the editors may contact the referee of a paper for follow-up advice. The editors will reconcile all advice received to reach a decision. The decision types are: Publish as is, Minor Revision, Major revision, or Reject. The decision is sent to the author along with the comments for the authors.
Authors are invited to take the referees’ criticisms seriously. When invited to resubmit, authors should make every attempt to address all criticisms presented to them.
The editors will not reveal the referees’ identities to authors or to other referees, conversely, referees will refrain from identifying themselves to the authors.
Referees must treat the review process and all material related as strictly confidential. Referees may seek the opinion and consult with colleagues but should inform the editors first to preserve the integrity of the review process. When seeking these external opinions, the referee should first consider possible conflict of interests. The editors also ask that referees report their own conflict of interest.
Authors may appeal the decision to reject a manuscript. To be considered, a formal appeal must provide a case for further consideration. If referee reports were included with the rejection letter, then these criticisms must be responded to in the appeal.
Once an appeal is submitted, the editors collate all information relevant to the manuscript. This includes the cover letter, the communications with the authors, and referee reports, if any. This information is shared and discussed with the Editor-in-Chief, with all editors working on original research manuscripts, and with relevant editors in terms of expertise, who have no conflict of interest with the work presented. In some cases, a member of the journal’s Editorial Advisory Board will be consulted, also. The discussion is based on the manuscript under consideration, as well as on the range of submissions the journal receives in the area, the overall status of the field, and the editors’ expectations for a paper in the area.
If successful, an appeal can lead to the article’s review being resumed. Otherwise, the original rejection decision is upheld. The author of a paper that has been rejected after an appeal may request that the Publisher of AIP Publishing review the manuscript. The Publisher does not decide whether a manuscript should be accepted but rather assesses whether editors followed the proper procedures for reviewing the manuscript. If editors did not follow the proper procedures, they will review the manuscript again and decide whether to publish.
Criteria for Publication
Content. AQS publishes original research, reviews, perspectives, and roadmaps.
To be published in AQS, an original research paper must have the potential to influence thinking in the field and should make a fundamental discovery or represent a significant advancement in understanding of an existing problem. Moreover, it must meet several general criteria:
- Validity: The paper must provide strong evidence for its conclusions, and the data must be technically sound.
- Novelty: The paper must report original scientific research that was not previously published elsewhere.
- Interest: The paper must be important to researchers in its specific field and be of interest to a broader readership.
- Clarity: The paper must be organized in a reasonable and cohesive manner.
Although there is no length limit, original research articles should be as concise as possible and present a clear description of the research. Articles should include sufficient information to allow other researchers to reproduce the reported results. Authors may include supplementary material, including video or other multimedia files. In all cases, the editors decide whether the length of an article is appropriate for the information presented.
Review articles provide either comprehensive or focused overviews of innovative research in quantum science. Reviews that, in the editor’s or referee’s opinion, do not meet this standard will be rejected. There are no strict page limits set but we provide the following advice. Focused Reviews are short, timely reviews that cover recent advances in established fields or an emerging area of quantum science and are approximately 10 – 20 pages in length. Standard Reviews are comprehensive, providing more in-depth coverage in established areas of quantum science, that are approximately, 20-50 pages in length.
Perspectives are on topics currently generating a great deal of interest in the quantum science research community. They provide a look at recent advances in a subfield of quantum science and where it is headed. A Perspective needs to contain an assessment of the current status of the field, which can be achieved either through a mini-review component or with the presentation of new, unpublished data and original results. Perspectives are distinctly different from Review articles in that emphasis is put on very recent developments, possibly leading to disruptive technologies, open questions, and possible solutions. Perspectives are characterized by personal views and opinions of the authors who are recognized experts in their field, on where the field is headed.
A Roadmap is a type of review article. This article type combines multiple sections, each written by different authors. The content of a Roadmap should focus on the status, advances, challenges, and future directions of subtopics within a field from multiple expert perspectives. As a united review, the Roadmap should provide a high-level overview of the field as a whole. Roadmaps should be composed when there is a need or opportunity for useful discussion and evaluation of the field. If you are interested in submitting a roadmap to AQS please contact the editorial team for the appropriate next steps at email@example.com.
Tutorials are intended as educational resources and tools at the advanced-graduate level. The aim of Tutorials is to help shape the new generation of researchers in quantum science and to support researchers interested in specific techniques and/or improving their skills in a particular area. Original research content is not required, but Tutorials should explain—by taking a pedagogical approach—principles and methods of established techniques related to a research subfield. These articles are also expected to present a broad overview of the objectives, results, and open questions for the techniques presented.
For more specific details on preparing your manuscript please visit the Author Instructions page.
Language standard: It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that manuscripts are written clearly. A manuscript can be rejected if the scientific meaning is unclear due to poor English. Manuscripts that do not meet the AQS language standard will be returned to the authors for rewrite before peer review, during the review process and/or if provisionally accepted pending language editing.
Since good science has no value unless it is clearly communicated, AIP Publishing recommends that authors use AIPP Author Services to improve the quality of your paper’s written English. AIPP Author Services was developed in line with our commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion for all authors. Using this service ensures that your paper will be free of language deficiencies, so editors and reviewers will be able to fully understand your research during the review process. A native English-speaking subject matter expert of AIP Author Services will correct spelling, grammar and punctuation and verify the use and consistency of technical terms and content in your paper. Note that this is not a requirement or a guarantee of acceptance for review or publication.
Patents. Authors who submit manuscripts containing ideas that may be patentable, do so at their own risk. Neither AQS nor AIP Publishing assumes any responsibility in this regard.
Byline. The person who submits the paper is responsible for ensuring that all authors approve of the inclusion of their names in the byline. After the submission date, whenever a coauthor is removed from, or added to, a byline, we must have a signed agreement of that coauthor before we publish the manuscript.
Copyright. Authors publishing in AQS must complete an exclusive License-to-Publish Agreement before the journal publishes their manuscript. To avoid unnecessary delays, authors should sign the agreement electronically submitting the manuscript.
Authors have the right to post their AQS-accepted manuscript anywhere on the Web immediately after AIP Publishing accepts it for publication. In addition, 12 months after publication, authors may post the final AIP Publishing version on their personal website, the author's institutional website, or in an institutional or funder-designated repository. You may create a link to the AQS publication. For more information view our detailed Web Posting Guidelines.
Comments and Responses. The purpose of Comments is to correct significant errors in articles published in the journal, to rebut conclusions reached, or to provide additional insight or corroboration. Comments must address scientific issues only and be concise, substantive, and contain no harsh criticism. We discourage Comments on questions of priority or calling attention to an oversight in a reference list. Generally, the editor will invite the authors of the Article in question to submit a Response. The Editor-in-Chief decides whether to accept a Comment and Response for publication only after the two parties have submitted final versions of their pieces. The Editor-in-Chief may send a Comment and Response to an adjudicator or reject them entirely.
Errata. The journal publishes Errata, in which authors correct significant errors of substance in their published manuscripts. The title should read: “Erratum: <original title> [Appl. Phys. Rev., vol. <number>, page <number> (<year>)]”. This is followed by the authors' names and institutions and the text of the corrected version. Errata should be clear and concise.
Retraction and Correction Policies
AIP Publishing’s policy is based on best practices in academic publishing. We take seriously our responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of our content. We place great importance on the authority of articles after we publish them. Authors may make changes to articles after they have been published online only under the circumstances outlined in AIP Publishing’s Retraction and Correction Policies.
If your manuscript is not accepted for publication in AQS, an editor may recommend a transfer to another AIP Publishing or AVS journal for immediate consideration.
If you wish to transfer your manuscript to another AIP Publishing journal, please contact the AQS editorial office to request a transfer. A list of AIP Publishing and AVS journals and descriptions can be found in our list of journals. We offer this transfer service as a convenience to authors so that they do not have to resubmit a manuscript to another AIP Publishing journal. Carefully review the acceptance criteria for the journal you believe would be appropriate for your manuscript. All reviewer reports and editor recommendations will be transferred along with the manuscript. Manuscripts must meet the receiving journal’s acceptance criteria. Note that there is no guarantee that the receiving journal will accept and publish a transferred manuscript.