月期刊平台服务过的文章录用时间为1-3个月，依据20年经验，经月期刊专家预审通过后的文章，投稿通过率100%以上！
《技术物理学》是一本包含应用物理学各方面实用信息的期刊，特别是仪器和测量技术。重点研究等离子体物理及其相关领域，如电磁场中带电粒子的研究、同步辐射、电子束和离子束、气体激光器和放电等。其他的期刊主题是凝聚态的性质，包括半导体、超导体、气体、液体和不同的材料。同行评审《技术物理学》是一本同行评议期刊。我们使用单一的盲同行评审格式。我们的评审团队包括来自5个国家的130多名国内外评审人员(95%)。2017年从提交到首次评审的平均周期为50天，从首次评审到验收的平均周期为40天。2017年投稿退稿率为20%。接受发表的文章，由总编或者副总编、栏目编辑作出最后决定。被邀请的审稿人因利益冲突，认为不符合审稿条件或者不能审稿的，应当及时通知审稿人，并予以拒绝。审稿人应以一种合理合理的方式清晰地阐述自己的观点，这样作者才能利用审稿人的观点来完善稿件。必须避免对作者的个人批评。评论者应该显示发表的一篇评论(我)任何相关的工作没有被引用的作者,(2)任何已报道在以前的出版物和没有适当的参考或引用,(2)任何实质性相似或重叠与其他手稿(发表或未发表)的个人知识。
https://www.springer.com/physics/classical+continuum+physics/journal/11454
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appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.
