Physical Review B Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

PRB has no length limit on Regular Articles and measures Letters in words (4,500), counted by the APS Length Guide. This is typical of APS journals, which tend to let the physics dictate the length of full papers.

The absence of a length limit for Regular Articles is genuine, and APS says PRB welcomes longer papers that provide depth and authority. Referees are asked whether a manuscript's content justifies its length, so unnecessary length can still draw comments.

Letters (the current name for what were previously called Rapid Communications) have a 4,500-word limit. APS counts text, captions, footnotes, displayed math, and word equivalents for figures and tables, and excludes the title, author list, abstract, acknowledgments and references. APS also says manuscripts that fit within 4 REVTeX pages are likely to conform for PRB Letters. The Letter format is for important results that are accessible in a short format; APS gives Letters priority handling.

A practical tip: use \documentclass[aps,prb,reprint]{revtex4-2} to get a rough estimate of your published page count; APS says REVTeX 4.2 is not exact enough to determine final length and calculates length as described in its Length Guide. The preprint option (double-spaced, single-column) will make your manuscript look much longer than the final output.

PRB's abstract conventions are straightforward, reflecting physics publishing norms.

• Length: About 5% of the article and less than 500 words, per APS Style Basics

• Structure: Unstructured (single paragraph)

• Citations: No numbered references; incorporate source listings directly into the abstract text

• Math: No displayed equations or tables in the abstract

The abstract should state the problem, summarize the approach, and present the main results. In condensed matter physics, abstracts often include specific numerical results ("We find a transition temperature of 42 K" or "The band gap narrows by 0.3 eV under 5% strain").

For Letters, APS publishes no separate abstract limit, so the same guidance applies; a short abstract that focuses on the single main result suits the format.

PACS numbers and subject areas: PRB used to require PACS (Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme) numbers. This system has been replaced by PhySH (Physics Subject Headings) terms selected during submission. You don't need to include PACS numbers in the manuscript itself.

PRB has relatively flexible figure requirements compared to Elsevier or Wiley journals. The physics community has long-established conventions for figure quality, and PRB follows them.

Figure specifications:

Preferred figure formats are .ps, .eps, .jpg and .png. EPS has a long history in the physics community's relationship with LaTeX and PostScript, and EPS files integrate cleanly with REVTeX. For color-online-only figures APS requires a .ps or .eps file for production. If you're generating figures from matplotlib, gnuplot, or similar tools, export directly to EPS or PDF.

Color policy: PRB publishes color figures free of charge online. For the print edition, APS charges US $1090 for a single color figure and $595 for each additional color figure. Many authors choose color online with grayscale in print to avoid the fee. If you go this route, make sure your figures are interpretable in grayscale. Use different line styles (solid, dashed, dotted) in addition to colors, and avoid relying solely on color to distinguish data series.

Table formatting:

• Use LaTeX tabular or table environments

• Every column needs a header

• Use \hline sparingly (top, below header, bottom)

• Units in column headers, not in individual cells

• Notes below tables using \footnote or manual superscripts

PRB uses the APS reference style. If you're using REVTeX with BibTeX (which you should be), the formatting is handled automatically.

In-text citations: Numerals in square brackets, e.g., as shown previously [1,2], numbered consecutively in the order of first citation.

Reference list format (generated by BibTeX):

[1] A. B. Author and C. D. Author, Title of article, Phys. Rev. B 100, 123456 (2019).

Key formatting details:

• Author names: First initials then last name (A. B. Smith)

• Journal titles abbreviated per APS conventions

• Volume in bold

• Page or article number followed by year in parentheses

• DOIs included automatically by modern BibTeX styles

• For books: Author, Title (Publisher, City, Year)

• For preprints: Author, arXiv:XXXX.XXXXX

The APS BibTeX style file (apsrev4-2.bst) handles all of this. Don't format references manually. Use a .bib file and let BibTeX do the work.

One important detail: PRB accepts and cites arXiv preprints in the reference list. This is standard practice in physics. If a paper is on arXiv but not yet published, cite the arXiv identifier. If it's been published, cite the journal version and optionally include the arXiv number.

APS publishes no reference cap. APS asks for all author names for references with up to ten authors; for more than ten, up to 20 names can be listed followed by et al. PRB also requires titles in all references of the published paper (APS adds them in production if you omit them).

APS handles Supplemental Material differently from Elsevier or Wiley. The material is hosted on the APS server and linked from the article page, but it's not typeset by APS.

What goes in Supplemental Material:

• Extended derivations and mathematical proofs

• Additional figures (band structures, phase diagrams, convergence tests)

• Computational details (pseudopotential parameters, convergence criteria, code versions)

• Raw data tables

• Video files (simulations, experimental processes)

Format requirements:

• Submit text documents as PDF, the format APS recommends

• Use your own numbering (Fig. S1, Table S1, Section S1)

• Files are published as submitted: APS does not copyedit or alter Supplemental Material

• Cite it in the reference list as: See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] for [brief description]

Because APS doesn't typeset the Supplemental Material, it's your responsibility to make it look professional. Use the same REVTeX template for the supplement as for the main text. Include a title, author list, and clear section structure.

A practical note: PRB reviewers have access to Supplemental Material during review. Some reviewers read it carefully; others don't. Don't put information in the supplement that's essential for understanding the main results. If a reviewer needs to check the supplement to follow your argument, that content probably belongs in the main paper.

PRB uses the APS submission system at APS journal page.

Required components:

• Manuscript PDF with all text and figures in a single file (the only file APS requires for a new submission)

• Source files (.tex, .bib, figure files), which APS requests after acceptance

• Supplemental Material as a separate PDF (if any)

• Cover letter (APS asks Letter authors to justify the Letter format in the submission letter)

APS-specific requirements:

• Author ORCID: Encouraged for all authors, required for the corresponding author

• Funding information: Funding agencies are cited in the Acknowledgments section

• Data availability: APS requires a Data Availability Statement for all published articles

Length check for Letters: Letters are limited to 4,500 words. APS says that if a paper is determined to be overlength at submission, you will be asked to shorten it.

Preprints: APS supports submission directly from arXiv and asks authors to disclose the e-print number of related manuscripts deposited on a preprint server. Check APS's current preprint posting policy on its Open Science information page before posting.

These are the formatting details that experienced PRB authors know:

REVTeX is the preferred route. APS accepts Word, but says its use is extremely limited in the production process, while source files in REVTeX are converted to XML for the online version and PDF. Using REVTeX saves you and the editorial team effort.

Article numbers replaced page numbers. PRB articles are identified by volume number and a six-digit article number rather than page numbers. A reference to a 2020 paper looks like "Phys. Rev. B 101, 045101 (2020)" where 045101 is the article number. This is handled automatically by BibTeX with current .bst files.

Section headings follow the APS Style Guide. Regular articles use numbered principal headings (I. PRINCIPAL HEADING in capitals, with A., 1. and a. subheadings), and APS notes that headings are not always required for short papers; Letters use optional run-in italic headings.

Equation formatting matters. PRB is a physics journal. Equations are first-class content, not appendages. Number all important equations. Use \begin{equation} for standalone equations and \begin{align} for multi-line equations. Don't use $$...$$ (it's deprecated in LaTeX2e).

Appendices are common. PRB papers frequently include one or more appendices for detailed derivations, proofs, or extended analysis. These appear after the main text and before the references. Use \appendix followed by \section{Title} in REVTeX.

Color figure caution for print. Design figures to be readable in grayscale if you're choosing "color online, grayscale in print." APS uses the same figure file for the print and online versions, so a color figure has to read clearly in grayscale.

Two-column vs single-column figures. Use figure for single-column and figure for double-column (full-width) figures. Place figure environments at the top of the page for best results.

These trip up PRB authors regularly:

1. REVTeX version. Use REVTeX 4.2, not 4.1 or earlier. Older versions are still in some institutional templates but are missing current APS formatting options.

1. BibTeX style file. Use apsrev4-2.bst, not apsrev4-1.bst or generic styles. The older style files don't handle article numbers or DOIs correctly.

1. Figure format. Preferred formats are .ps, .eps, .jpg and .png. If you submit JPEG files with compression artifacts, reviewers and editors will notice. Export publication-quality vector graphics.

1. Letter length. The limit is 4,500 words, counted by the APS Length Guide; APS says a 4-page REVTeX manuscript is likely to conform. Compile with the reprint option to check the page count, and don't rely on the preprint (double-spaced) page count.

1. Supplemental Material formatting. APS publishes it as-is. If your supplemental PDF has typos, bad figure quality, or inconsistent formatting, that's what readers see.

For Physical Review B-targeted manuscripts, three patterns consistently predict formatting desk-screen failure at Physical Review B (PRB). The patterns below are the same ones the journal's handling editors and outside reviewers flag at first-pass triage.

Scope-fit ambiguity in the abstract. Physical Review B editors move fastest on manuscripts whose contribution is obviously aligned with condensed-matter physics advance with full theoretical or experimental characterization. The named failure pattern: papers with preliminary derivation lacking explicit comparison to existing PRB literature extend revision rounds. Check whether your abstract reads to Physical Review B's scope

Methods package incomplete for the journal's reviewer pool. Physical Review B reviewers expect specific methodological detail. Computational-only papers without experimental validation extend reviewer consultation. Check if your methods package is reviewer-complete

Reference-list and clean-citation failure mode. Editorial team at Physical Review B (PRB) screens reference lists for retracted-paper inclusion. Check whether your reference list is clean against Crossref + Retraction Watch

Manusights submission-corpus signal for Physical Review B (PRB). Of the manuscripts our team screened before submission to Physical Review B and peer venues in 2025, the editorial-culture mismatch most consistent across the cohort is PRB editors expect rigorous derivation and explicit comparison to existing condensed-matter literature; preliminary claims extend revision rounds. In our analysis of anonymized Physical Review B-targeted submissions,

For manuscripts targeting Physical Review B, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

REVTeX source that does not compile or does not follow APS style. APS prefers LaTeX source files and advises the REVTeX 4.2 document class, but needs only a PDF for peer review and asks for source files after acceptance. APS staff check incoming submissions for file readability and certain style and formatting requirements before peer review, and papers that fail those checks are rejected without external review. APS provides a REVTeX 4.2 guide and author template that handles APS reference formatting and two-column layout. Submitting without checking that the REVTeX source compiles cleanly is a common avoidable technical error.

Scope ambiguity between PRB and Physical Review Letters. Physical Review B covers condensed matter physics, materials physics, and electronic structure: a well-defined but broad scope. A common submission error is sending a result that is either too incremental for PRB (better suited for lower-impact journals in the APS family) or of such broad interest that the authors should have targeted PRL.

Editors evaluate whether the advance is significant for the condensed matter or materials community specifically, and whether it merits a full paper. Letters in PRB are limited to 4,500 words; letters-quality work with broad significance should go to PRL.

Computational papers lacking full methodological transparency. Physical Review B reviewers expect complete specification of all DFT functionals, k-point sampling, cutoff energies, pseudopotential sources, and convergence criteria for electronic structure calculations. Manuscripts that describe the software used (VASP, Quantum ESPRESSO, Wien2k) without specifying the computational parameters are flagged for Methods revision. For materials property calculations, the crystal structure, space group, and Wyckoff positions must be provided or referenced to an open database (ICSD, Materials Project) with the entry identifier.

Theoretical results not compared to available experimental data. For theoretical or computational condensed matter papers, PRB reviewers assess whether the authors have compared their predictions to available experimental measurements, even if the comparison reveals discrepancies worth explaining. Manuscripts that present theoretical calculations as standalone contributions without contextualizing against experimental measurements in the literature are asked to address this gap. If experimental data are genuinely unavailable, the authors should state this explicitly and explain why.

A Physical Review B formatting and readiness check evaluates manuscript structure, REVTeX compliance, and computational methodology completeness against these desk-rejection patterns before you submit.

Or see example reports before you finalize.