Winning an award doesn't mean you have to brag about it. It's not about self-aggrandizing, but rather about the quality of your work. If you are a serious physicist, ask yourself how many people actually think this journal is better than PRL. It's really awkward.

(0) 讚！ | oihoigo

The quality of the PR series articles fluctuates relatively greatly, with Communications Physics having an Impact Factor of around 6 in recent years and a published acceptance rate of around 30% (though the actual acceptance rate may be lower). The average level of its articles should be slightly higher than that of the PR series' Letters

(0) 讚！ | PRLKING

What is the quality level of this journal? Can it compare with the PR series?

(0) 讚！ | 数学物理

Nature Series Journals "Ladder" Diagram: General--->Subdivision--->General--->Subdivision--->Subdivision--->General, with both division and consolidation:
                                                          (General)  Nature
                          (Various disciplines) Nature Physics/Materials/Chemistry/Medicine/......
                                           (General) Nature Communications
               (Various disciplines) Communications Physics/Materials/Chemistry/Medicine/......
               (Various subdivided disciplines) Npj quantum materials/Computational Materials/......
                                                 (General) Scientific reports

(1) 讚！ | PRLKING

What is the level of this journal? Can it compare to the PR series?

(0) 讚！ | 数学物理

It is generally more difficult than NJP and the submission period is usually longer

(0) 讚！ | 荣神益人---是光是盐

How do you find the difficulty of this journal compared to NJP?

(0) 讚！ | 佐治

The level of this journal has been gradually improving and is currently slightly higher than the PR series Letters. Its position closely follows PRL and is classified as a first-tier journal by the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

(0) 讚！ | PRLKING

What level is this journal exactly?

(0) 讚！ | 数学物理

The niche biophysical topic, transferred from a small NC, received the first version of the review comments after three months, requiring major revisions, and the revised manuscript was accepted.

(0) 讚！ | Ryansss

Hello, can you please share some detailed information about the submission status?

(0) 讚！ | 数学物理

Hello, can you please share detailed information about the submission status?

(0) 讚！ | 数学物理

Professional review, the quality of journal articles is good, when will it be upgraded to Zone 1?

(2) 讚！ | 达拉崩吧

2680 euros, too expensive...

(0) 讚！ | Cola-Guan

Submit for one month and receive comments from the reviewers. After careful revision and reply, waiting for the results!

(123) 讚！ | 荣神益人---是光是盐

I made a mistake, it is six months... There is also a reason I caused the delay myself.

(3) 讚！ | msxcs

The newly released impact factor of Communications Physics is 6.368, which closely follows the impact factor of 9.161 for PRL (Physical Review Letters) in the field of physics. Currently, the proportion of articles by Chinese authors is not high. For those interested in investing, please do so as soon as possible.

(57) 讚！ | 乘风破浪

A very promising journal, currently with an annual publication of less than 300 articles. In the field of physics, it is expected to become a top-tier publication following PRL and PRX.

(61) 讚！ | 乘风破浪

Do you mean this work "Terahertz strong-field physics in light-emitting diodes for terahertz detection and imaging"? Have you tried submitting this work to PRL, PRX, or Science Advances before submitting it to Communications Physics?

(0) 讚！ | PRLER

I mainly work on the interaction between strong terahertz fields and semiconductors. The review process went through three rounds. 

In the first round, there were three reviewers, one was positive, and the other two required major revisions. One of the reviewers raised 17 technical and mechanistic questions, while another reviewer was mainly unsatisfied with the model and said that a more accurate model was needed. In terms of experiments, all reviewers felt that they were done well and did not require additional experiments. However, the calibration of the time-domain spectroscopy and the terahertz field intensity were not clearly explained in the paper and needed to be supplemented. Overall, all reviewers provided constructive comments, showing their expertise in the field. It was my first time submitting an article, and I felt lucky to have these rigorous reviewers. I then responded to their requests and made modifications accordingly. However, I couldn't find a better model right away, so I tried to convince the reviewers that this model was used in other journals before, which should be suitable here.

In the second round, the second reviewer who suggested modifications to the model mentioned that I had provided more detailed descriptions of the mechanistic aspects later on and also praised the beautiful experiments. However, the first reviewer still found flaws in the mechanistic aspects and the time delay calibration. They strongly emphasized the importance of maintaining academic standards. This time, I was given three months to respond to the review.

Finally, I had to go back to the paper and finally found a suitable model to address the issues. In the last round, it was accepted for publication.

The whole process took about nine months.

(16) 讚！ | 穹冥