《技術(shù)物理學(xué)》是一本包含應(yīng)用物理學(xué)各方面實(shí)用信息的期刊，特別是儀器和測(cè)量技術(shù)。重點(diǎn)研究等離子體物理及其相關(guān)領(lǐng)域，如電磁場(chǎng)中帶電粒子的研究、同步輻射、電子束和離子束、氣體激光器和放電等。其他的期刊主題是凝聚態(tài)的性質(zhì)，包括半導(dǎo)體、超導(dǎo)體、氣體、液體和不同的材料。同行評(píng)審《技術(shù)物理學(xué)》是一本同行評(píng)議期刊。我們使用單一的盲同行評(píng)審格式。我們的評(píng)審團(tuán)隊(duì)包括來(lái)自5個(gè)國(guó)家的130多名國(guó)內(nèi)外評(píng)審人員(95%)。2017年從提交到首次評(píng)審的平均周期為50天，從首次評(píng)審到驗(yàn)收的平均周期為40天。2017年投稿退稿率為20%。接受發(fā)表的文章，由總編或者副總編、欄目編輯作出最后決定。被邀請(qǐng)的審稿人因利益沖突，認(rèn)為不符合審稿條件或者不能審稿的，應(yīng)當(dāng)及時(shí)通知審稿人，并予以拒絕。審稿人應(yīng)以一種合理合理的方式清晰地闡述自己的觀點(diǎn)，這樣作者才能利用審稿人的觀點(diǎn)來(lái)完善稿件。必須避免對(duì)作者的個(gè)人批評(píng)。評(píng)論者應(yīng)該顯示發(fā)表的一篇評(píng)論(我)任何相關(guān)的工作沒(méi)有被引用的作者,(2)任何已報(bào)道在以前的出版物和沒(méi)有適當(dāng)?shù)膮⒖蓟蛞?(2)任何實(shí)質(zhì)性相似或重疊與其他手稿(發(fā)表或未發(fā)表)的個(gè)人知識(shí)。

Technical Physics is a journal that contains practical information on all aspects of applied physics, especially instrumentation and measurement techniques. Particular emphasis is put on plasma physics and related fields such as studies of charged particles in electromagnetic fields, synchrotron radiation, electron and ion beams, gas lasers and discharges. Other journal topics are the properties of condensed matter, including semiconductors, superconductors, gases, liquids, and different materials.PEER REVIEWTechnical Physics is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes over 130 reviewers, both internal and external (95%), from 5 countries. The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 50 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 40 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 20%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief or the Deputy Editor-in-Chief or the Section Editor.Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.