Journal Guide
Physical Review B Impact Factor 3.7: Publishing Guide
Condensed matter physics from electrons to materials - fundamental discoveries and technological applications.
3.7
Impact Factor (2024)
~35%
Acceptance Rate
~60 days to first decision
Time to First Decision
What Physical Review B Publishes
Physical Review B is the American Physical Society's flagship journal for condensed matter physics. It covers electronic structure, magnetic properties, superconductivity, semiconductors, nanomaterials, and all phenomena arising from interactions in condensed systems. The journal accepts both fundamental theoretical work and experimental studies of material properties.
- Electronic structure and band theory
- Magnetic properties and magnetic materials
- Superconductivity and quantum phenomena
- Semiconductors and electronic devices
- Optical and transport properties
- Nanoscale physics and quantum dots
- Strongly correlated systems and exotic states
Editor Insight
“Physical Review B publishes condensed matter physics that contributes to our understanding of materials and phenomena. Your research doesn't need to be revolutionary - it needs to be rigorous and add knowledge. Whether you're computing electronic structure, measuring material properties, or predicting novel phenomena, show me you understand the physics deeply. What's the physical mechanism? Why does this material behave this way? If you can answer those questions clearly, your work belongs in PRB.”
What Physical Review B Editors Look For
Rigorous theoretical or experimental treatment
PRB accepts diverse approaches - ab initio calculations, experimental measurements, theoretical models. But all must be rigorous. Sloppy theory or experiments don't meet standards.
Clear physical insight, not just numbers
PRB readers want understanding. Whether you compute band structures or measure transport properties, explain what it means physically. Why does this material behave this way?
Appropriate methodology for the problem
Use the right tool. Density functional theory for some problems, Monte Carlo for others, experiments for others. Justify your approach.
Comprehensive treatment of the phenomenon
Study your system thoroughly - temperature dependence, field dependence, pressure effects. Partial studies of complex phenomena are less compelling.
Connection to condensed matter physics principles
Ground your work in established condensed matter theory. Even novel phenomena should be understandable within the framework of condensed matter physics.
Honest discussion of limitations
Theory is approximate; experiments have uncertainty. Acknowledge these limitations. Papers that carefully consider what they can and can't claim are stronger.
Why Papers Get Rejected
These patterns appear repeatedly in manuscripts that don't make it past Physical Review B's editorial review:
Isolated experimental measurements without physical context
Measuring some property isn't interesting by itself. Connect it to condensed matter physics - how does it relate to electronic structure? Magnetic interactions? Quantum phenomena?
Computational work without experimental validation
Theory needs grounding. Predictions that aren't validated experimentally are speculative. Theory + experiment together is much stronger.
Inadequate computational methodology
If using DFT, specify functional, basis set, convergence criteria. If using other methods, justify choices. Vague computational methods get rejected.
Incomplete characterization of materials
For experimental condensed matter, you need full characterization - structure, chemistry, purity. Poorly characterized samples raise questions about results.
Results that don't advance condensed matter physics understanding
PRB wants contributions to the field. Measurements of obscure properties with no broader implications are less interesting.
Poor connection to existing condensed matter knowledge
Place your work in context. How does it relate to known phenomena? What does it tell us that we didn't know?
Does your manuscript avoid these patterns?
The quick diagnostic reads your full manuscript against Physical Review B's criteria and flags the specific issues most likely to cause rejection.
Insider Tips from Physical Review B Authors
PRB has reasonable acceptance rate for good work
With ~35% acceptance rate, PRB is more accessible than high-impact journals. Solid condensed matter research gets published.
Theory and experiment combinations are strongest
Papers combining theoretical predictions with experimental verification are highly competitive. They tell complete stories.
Novel materials often get good reception
New materials with interesting electronic, magnetic, or quantum properties attract attention. Detailed characterization of properties is key.
Temperature and field dependence strengthen studies
Showing how properties vary with temperature, magnetic field, or pressure reveals underlying physics. Thorough variable studies are valued.
Preprints on arXiv are standard
Physics community routinely posts preprints. This doesn't affect PRB novelty assessment and gets your work visible immediately.
High-quality figures are appreciated
Complex band structures, phase diagrams, or property plots must be clear and well-explained. Invest in figure quality.
Computational efficiency and scalability matter
If you've developed a computational method, show it's efficient and scales to larger systems. Practical algorithms are valued.
Emerging phenomena get attention
Discovery of novel phases, unexpected property behaviors, or exotic quantum states are particularly competitive.
The Physical Review B Submission Process
Complete theoretical or experimental investigation
Research phase - months typicallyFor theory: finish all computations, test against known results, analyze physical implications. For experiments: fully characterize materials and properties, gather data across ranges of parameters.
Submit via APS online system
Submission stepUse Physical Review Online Manuscript Submission system. Provide abstract emphasizing physical significance. Suggest 4-5 expert reviewers in your condensed matter specialty.
Editorial triage
3-5 daysEditors assess scope and quality. PRB is inclusive of condensed matter physics topics. Most in-scope papers pass to peer review. Desk rejections rare.
Peer review
40-60 days typical2 expert physicists review. They assess rigor (computational or experimental), physical significance, clarity, and novelty. PRB reviewers are usually knowledgeable and fair.
Revision or acceptance
Editor decision within 1 week of final reviewsDecision options: accept, minor revisions, major revisions, or reject. Revision requests are usually reasonable. Revised papers may return to reviewers if major changes requested.
Publication
2-3 weeks to online publicationAccepted papers enter production quickly. Online publication typically within 2-3 weeks. Assigned to specific volume and issue.
Physical Review B by the Numbers
| 2024 Impact Factor(Clarivate JCR 2024) | 3.7 |
| 5-Year Impact Factor | 3.9 |
| CiteScore (Scopus) | 7.1 |
| Submissions per year | ~5,000 |
| Overall acceptance rate | ~35% |
| Desk rejection rate | ~10-15% |
| Post-review acceptance | ~50-60% of reviewed manuscripts |
| Median first decision | ~60 days |
| Median acceptance to publication | ~90-120 days total |
| Founded(American Physical Society) | 1970 |
| Publication frequency | Multiple issues per month |
| ISSN | 1098-0121 |
Before you submit
Physical Review B accepts a small fraction of submissions. Make your attempt count.
The pre-submission diagnostic runs a live literature search, scores your manuscript section by section, and gives you a prioritized fix list calibrated to Physical Review B. ~30 minutes.
Article Types
Regular Article
~4,000-8,000 wordsFull condensed matter physics research with complete results and interpretation. Typically 4,000-8,000 words with figures and equations integrated.
Rapid Communication
~3,000-3,500 wordsFaster track for time-sensitive condensed matter discoveries. Emphasis on significance and novelty. Shorter format with expedited review.
Comment or Reply
~1,000-1,500 wordsCritical comments on recent PRB papers or author replies. Used for technical corrections or clarifications.
Landmark Physical Review B Papers
Papers that defined fields and changed science:
- Graphene discovery and electronic properties - revolutionizing 2D materials physics
- High-temperature superconductor mechanisms - advancing understanding of superconductivity
- Topological materials and quantum states - opening new condensed matter phenomena
- Strongly correlated electron systems revealing exotic properties
- Computational studies of materials predicting properties before synthesis
Preparing a Physical Review B Submission?
Get pre-submission feedback from reviewers who've published in Physical Review B and know exactly what editors look for.
Run Free Readiness ScanNeed expert depth? Human review from $1,000
Primary Fields
Related Journal Guides
All journal guidesRelated Articles
- Desk Rejection: What It Means, Why It Happens, and What to Do Next
- How to Respond to Reviewer Comments (Without Losing Your Mind)
- How to Choose the Right Journal for Your Paper (A Practical Guide)
- Pre-Submission Scientific Review: What It Costs, When It Works, and When to Skip It
Ready to submit to Physical Review B?
A desk rejection costs months. Get expert feedback before you submit, from scientists who know exactly what Physical Review B editors look for.
Avoid Desk Rejection
Get expert pre-submission review before you submit to Physical Review B. 3-7 day turnaround.
Manuscript Rejected?
Expert revision help to strengthen your manuscript and resubmit with confidence.
Reviewer Response Help
Get expert guidance crafting your response to Physical Review B reviewers.
Need field-expert depth? Human review from $1,000