how to write research paper in physics

How To Write A Physics Research Paper | The Ultimate Guide

Do you want to know, How to write a Physics research paper? You are at the right place. This latest post will explore how to write a Physics research paper, the Conventions of Writing in Physics, and, most importantly, 10 Tips for writing a better physics research paper

And many more that can be helpful for you. So, without any delay, let’s get started.

Key Take Away

• Prioritize clarity and simplicity in language.
• Maintain a logical structure and flow in your paper.
• Utilize visual aids for enhanced comprehension.
• Connect results with discussions and emphasize future research directions.

How To Write A Physics Research Paper – Step By Step

Writing a physics research paper involves several steps. Here’s a simplified guide in easy English:

Step 1: Choose A Topic

Start by selecting a specific area of physics that interests you and make sure the topic is not too broad or too narrow; find a balance.

Step 2: Research

Gather information from reliable sources like scientific journals, books, and reputable websites and Take notes on key concepts, experiments, and relevant data.

Step 3: Create An Outline

Organize your ideas logically with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion and break down the main points and supporting details for each section.

Step 4: Write The Introduction

Introduce your topic explain its significance and clearly state your research question or hypothesis.

Step 5: Literature Review

Summarize previous research related to your topic and also highlight gaps in existing knowledge that your research aims to address.

Step 6: Methodology

Describe the methods and techniques you used to conduct your research and Include details such as equipment, procedures, and variables.

Step 7: Results

Present your findings using tables, graphs, and figures and Include a brief explanation of the results, but save the detailed analysis for the next section.

Step 8: Discussion

Analyze and interpret your results in the context of your research question also compare your findings with existing literature and explain any discrepancies.

Step 9: Conclusion

Summarize the key points of your research discuss the implications of your findings and suggest possible future research.

Step 10: Finalize Your Paper

Make the necessary revisions based on feedback and ensure all sections are well-written, and your paper is ready for submission.

Remember, take your time with each step and revise as needed.

Conventions Of Writing In Physics Research Paper 

Writing a physics research paper involves following specific conventions to communicate your ideas clearly and effectively. Here are some key conventions to consider:

• Choose a concise and informative title that accurately reflects the content of your paper.
• Avoid unnecessary words and focus on key concepts.

2. Abstract

• Write a clear and concise abstract that summarizes the purpose, methods, results, and conclusions of your research.
• Keep it brief, typically around 150-250 words.

3. Introduction

• Clearly state the research question or objective of your study.
• Provide background information and context for your work.
• State the significance of your study.

4. Theoretical Framework Or Methodology

• Clearly explain the theoretical framework or methodology used in your research.
• Provide enough detail for readers to understand the experimental setup or theoretical approach.
• Present your findings logically, using tables, figures, and graphs when appropriate.
• Ensure that your results are clearly labelled and easy to interpret.
• Include uncertainties or errors associated with measurements.

6. Discussion

• Interpret and analyze your results, explaining their significance.
• Compare your findings with previous research and discuss any discrepancies or agreements.
• Consider the limitations of your study.
• Relate your results to the research question or objective.

7. Conclusion

• Summarize the main findings of your study.
• Highlight the contributions of your research to the field.
• Suggest avenues for future research.

8. References

• Cite all relevant sources using a standard citation style (such as APA, MLA, Chicago, or a specific journal’s style).
• Ensure accuracy and consistency in your citations.

9. Equations And Symbols

• Clearly define all symbols and variables used in your equations.
• Number equations sequentially, and refer to them in the text.
• Use consistent notation throughout the paper.

10. Units And Measurements

• Use the International System of Units (SI) for measurements.
• Clearly state the units associated with all measurements.
• Be consistent with unit usage throughout the paper.

11. Figures And Tables

• Ensure that figures and tables are labelled and captioned appropriately.
• Use clear and high-quality graphics.
• Refer to figures and tables in the text and explain their significance.

12. Language

• Write in a clear, concise, and formal style.
• Avoid unnecessary jargon and use terminology consistently.
• Define any specialized terms or concepts that might not be familiar to a broad audience.

13. Acknowledgments

• Acknowledge funding sources, collaborations, or any assistance received during the research.

14. Appendices

• Include additional material, such as detailed calculations or supplementary data, in appendices.

15. Review And Revision

• Proofread and edit your paper for clarity, grammar, and style.
• Seek feedback from colleagues or mentors before submitting the final version.

By adhering to these conventions, you can enhance the clarity and credibility of your physics research paper. Always check the specific guidelines of the journal you are submitting to, as different journals may have slightly different requirements.

10 Tips For Writing A Better Physics Research Paper

Here are a few tips for writing a better physics  research paper

1. Clarity And Simplicity In Language

Writing your physics research paper in simple English is crucial for effective communication. Avoid unnecessary jargon and complex sentence structures. 

Clearly articulate your ideas using straightforward language to ensure your readers easily grasp the concepts you present.

2. Logical Structure And Flow

Organize your paper in a logical sequence with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. Ensure each paragraph flows smoothly into the next, creating a cohesive narrative. 

A well-structured paper enhances readability and helps readers follow your arguments seamlessly.

3. Precise Definitions And Explanations

Define key terms and concepts precisely. A thorough understanding of your terminology promotes clarity. 

Clearly explain any specialized terms or equations, providing sufficient context for readers who may not be experts in your specific field of physics.

4. Visual Aids For Clarity

Utilize figures, graphs, and tables to visually represent data and concepts. Visual aids can enhance comprehension and make complex information more accessible. 

Ensure that each visual element is appropriately labeled and complements the written content.

5. Conciseness Without Sacrificing Detail

Strive for conciseness while maintaining the necessary level of detail. Avoid unnecessary information that may distract from your main points. 

Be precise in your explanations, focusing on the key aspects that support your research objectives.

6. Effective Use of Citations

When referencing previous work, provide clear and concise citations. This not only lends credibility to your research but also allows readers to explore related studies for a deeper understanding. 

Follow the citation style recommended by your target journal or academic institution.

7. Thorough Literature Review

Conduct a comprehensive literature review to showcase your understanding of existing research in your field. Highlight the gaps in knowledge that your research aims to address. 

This demonstrates the significance of your work and places it within the broader context of the scientific community.

8. Transparent Methodology

Clearly describe your experimental or theoretical methods. Transparency in methodology allows readers to evaluate the validity of your results and replicate your experiments if needed. 

Provide sufficient details without overwhelming the reader with unnecessary minutiae.

9. Results And Discussion Connection

Connect your results with the corresponding discussion. Clearly articulate the implications of your findings and how they contribute to the overall research question. 

Relate your results to existing literature and theories to strengthen the scientific context of your paper.

10. Strong Conclusion And Future Directions

Summarize your key findings in the conclusion, emphasizing their significance. Discuss potential avenues for future research to inspire further exploration in your field. 

A strong conclusion leaves a lasting impression on readers and reinforces the importance of your contributions.

1. What Are The Essential Components Of A Physics Research Paper?

A physics research paper typically includes a title, abstract, introduction, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion, and references. 

Each section serves a specific purpose in presenting and analyzing your research.

2. How Do I Choose A Compelling Topic For My Physics Research Paper?

Select a topic that aligns with your interests and the current trends in physics. Ensure the topic has a clear research question or problem to address. 

Consult with your instructor or advisor for guidance on choosing a suitable and impactful topic.

3. What Is The Significance Of The Literature Review In A Physics Research Paper?

The literature review provides a comprehensive overview of existing research related to your topic. 

It helps establish the context for your study, highlights gaps in current knowledge, and demonstrates your understanding of the field. 

4. How Do I Effectively Present Experimental Or Theoretical Results In My Paper?

Organize and label your results using tables, graphs, or equations. Provide detailed explanations for each result, discussing their implications and relevance to your research question. 

Crafting a compelling physics research paper involves meticulous planning, adherence to conventions, and effective communication.

Following the step-by-step guide, understanding writing conventions, and implementing key tips contribute to a well-structured and impactful paper. 

Remember to prioritize clarity, logical flow, and precise definitions. Adhering to citation styles, transparent methodology, and a strong conclusion further elevate the quality of your work.

About The Author

Tom Baldwin

Stack Exchange Network

Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow , the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

How to write a paper in physics?

I really like to do research in physics and like to calculate to see what happen. However, I really find it hard to write a paper, to explain the results I obtained and to put them in order. One of the reasons is the lack of my vocabulary.

How do I write physics well? I think that writing physics is more dependent of an author's taste than writing mathematics is.

Are there any good reference I can consult when writing?

Or could you give me advice and tips on writing a paper?

What do you take into account when you start writing a paper?

What are your strategies on the process such as structuring the paper, writing a draft, polishing it, etc?

In addition, it is helpful to give me examples of great writing with the reason why you think it is good.

Do you have specific recommendations?

• soft-question
• resource-recommendations
• 3 $\begingroup$ A lot of people seem to appreciate Ed Witten's writing style. Maybe you'll pick up something if you read his papers. Other than just string theory, that is :-) $\endgroup$ –  Siva Commented Oct 23, 2011 at 1:41
• 4 $\begingroup$ There is a good link about technical writing given by Kip Thorne. Thanks, Jocelyn, for letting me know about it. physics.ubc.ca/computer/ksthorne-scientific-writing.pdf $\endgroup$ –  Satoshi Nawata Commented Oct 25, 2011 at 0:06
• $\begingroup$ Made this a community wiki, since many answers can be correct here. $\endgroup$ –  user566 Commented Dec 3, 2011 at 21:39
• 1 $\begingroup$ The link above no longer exists. One can find the article by Thorne lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/~patrick/downloads/… $\endgroup$ –  Satoshi Nawata Commented Apr 13, 2012 at 21:17
• $\begingroup$ And the last re-link no longer exists. I suppose it was the same as this one , which Kip himself uploaded. $\endgroup$ –  Mike Commented Jun 20, 2023 at 20:26

6 Answers 6

I bought The Art of Scientific Writing by Ebel, Bliefert and Russey a few years ago, and it's pretty good. However there is a huge amount that you can't really learn from a book.

The first thing you need to do is to read a lot of papers. I can't stress how important this is. You need to know what is going on in the field and what problems are still open and which are closed. Even with the open problems you need to know what other people have been doing to try to tackle them. Ideally when writing your first few papers you would have an advisor or supervisor who is experienced in these things, and will help you in choosing problems, and with deciding how best to present the results. If you don't have this, then the importance of reading papers will be amplified again. So at first, read read read!

As you read papers you will start to get a good feeling for which papers are well written and which are not. It's fairly obvious, so you shouldn't really need us to tell you what we consider good writing. The style may vary from field to field as well, so giving you an unfiltered list is probably not very helpful. You really need to build up your own idea of what style seems most clear to you.

As regards actually writing a paper, the way I tend to approach it is to first write out the structure in terms of section titles (even for PRL type papers which don't actually use them, in which case I remove them later), then I try to break it down to the level of what I want to say in each paragraph or so. And then I start writing the actual content. This is just my personal approach, and is not going to suit everybody well. Then you proof read the paper, again and again to make sure that everything makes sense and that you have defined all the notation and ideas you are using before you use them, and you make sure the language flows ok, and that you haven't accidentally broken a proof (which is easy to do).

Personally I like a more didactic style, but that's not to everyone's tastes.

For your first few papers (and frankly any paper you consider very important) it is important to ask a few other people to proof read them. If you spend a lot of time on a paper, you become to close to the manuscript and often don't see errors or where it can be improved. If you are just starting out writing papers, this should be a more experienced colleague (someone who has written very many papers), and you should take their advice and/or criticism seriously. When starting out, at least, it is very easy to have a distorted view of your papers. You may also need advice on what type and level of journal you should submit to, and whether the preprint is yet of sufficient standard to upload to the arxiv (you also shouldn't be submitting to journals if the paper isn't good enough for the arxiv), and this isn't something you can learn via generic question on the internet. You need someone with experience in the area to read through the paper in detail, and give you unfiltered feedback on it. As you publish more papers, you are better able to judge these things for yourself, but at the start it is very easy to go wrong here.

Lastly, unless you end up writing everything on your own, which is extremely unlikely in physics (and not a good sign in my view) you will find that the style of the papers you write will often end up being some sort of mix or compromise of the styles of the various authors.

• $\begingroup$ Thank you very much for your elaborate suggestions. It is very helpful. $\endgroup$ –  Satoshi Nawata Commented Oct 24, 2011 at 23:39

In addition to the Joe's answer , a bunch of good advices is here:

• G. M. Whitesides, Whitesides' Group: Writing a Paper (Adv Mat 2004), doi:10.1002/adma.200400767

Its two main points are:

• Start writing a draft as soon as you have some results, not - when the research is complete (as the later may never come).
• Write in a way which is the most convenient to the reader, not - the writer.
• 1 $\begingroup$ Thank you very much. It is important to write a draft in parallel with the research progress. $\endgroup$ –  Satoshi Nawata Commented Oct 24, 2011 at 23:41

References:

[1]. Joe Fitzsimon's response to this thread.

[2]. Piotr Migdal's response to this thread.

[3]. arivero's response to this thread.

Writing papers is no different to writing anything else, although with scientific papers, that has less to do with vocabulary than writing a novel, so you are not in such a bad position. However, that still leaves style, content and substance to be addressed, let alone how to keep your reader/reviewer reading.

The key, as with all writing, is to keep your reader interested. The only difference with scientific papers is the context in which it is read, and the reasons.

Reformulating other Responses to this Question:

To reformulate other responses to this question [see the references], the phrase "keeping readers interested" means:

a. Relevance: Writing a paper that is relevant to other researcher's work. As JFitz says, make sure your topic is current and not on a subject that has been closed. [Ref: 1]

b. Standards: Figuring out what is the standard for scientific papers in your field. Hence JFitz's suggestion to read a lot of papers in your field. If your paper doesn't match current standards, it will look unprofessional. [Ref: 1]

c. Think Like a reader: communication is all about being able to put yourself in the shoes of your reader. You presumably know more about what you are writing than he does, so your reader is at a disadvantage. You need to make the structure of your paper march in step with the development of the ideas. [Ref: 2]

d. Language: The language of physics is mathematics, so you can rely on this to convey your results. However, the odd good analogy helps. Just be careful of metaphors, they are pointless and irritating unless you are addressing laymen.

e. Peer reviews: For learning to write novels, there are peer review sites, such as Authonomy.com. I have never seen one for polishing papers, but there's an idea. [Ref: 1]

f. References and summaries: put people in the picture. If you can't summarise what you are trying to achieve in a couple of short paragraphs there is something wrong. The references give your reviewer/reader a handle and places to look for background information if they don't get what you are on about. No paper is an island. [Ref: 3]

g. Brevity: Long paragraphs are boring unless you are Charles Dickens. But then you wouldn't be writing papers...

Conclusions:

The responses here say as much as they can to you. Most people would work as part of the scientific community, and therefore, they don't need to ask these questions: the institution they work for hammers it into them.

But even if, nay, especially if you are working for some such institution, I hail you for making the effort to improve your papers.

If, on the other hand, you are working in the patents office in Bern, we will all be grateful for any extra clarity in your writing, and I hope that we have helped.

Help yourself by helping others is what this site is all about.

Parting Shot:

The reason for writing this response (apart from the two original contributions) is to illustrate that structuring what you write adds clarity and makes it easy to look up external references, as well as to help the paper be used itself as a reference.

I will add, that nowadays the introductory part -and even the overall length of the paper- is more important that in classic times. This is because if you paper is too much specialist (and it will be) you must give the reviewers a hint that you have done your homework, that you known your field of study and that you can even give some pointers to guide the revision just in case that the reviewer is not working in your subfield.

• 3 $\begingroup$ You also want to give your readers a hint, since if it is an important result you get a wider range of readers, and many may not necessarily be familiar with all of the tools you use. $\endgroup$ –  Joe Fitzsimons Commented Oct 24, 2011 at 10:19

I never forgot my old lecturer Robert Barrass and his book Scientists Must Write . - He never stood a chance, with me.

I still use the basic, 'Theory, diagram, experiment, results and conclusions' approach, otherwise I am lost!

I find this one useful. http://theory.tifr.res.in/~sgupta/edu/write.pdf (Haven't read it in toto)

• Featured on Meta
• Bringing clarity to status tag usage on meta sites
• We've made changes to our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy - July 2024
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process

Hot Network Questions

• Will the product of electrolysis of all dilute aqueous solutions be hydrogen or oxygen?
• What is the translation of point man in French?
• What's the airplane with the smallest ratio of wingspan to fuselage width?
• Extrude Individual Faces function is not working
• how to label a tikz path, where the node label extends outward perpendicular to the path at a point
• How do you "stealth" a relativistic superweapon?
• What is the origin and meaning of the phrase “wear the brown helmet”?
• Phrase for giving up?
• What's wrong with my app authentication scheme?
• Does epistemology categorize knowledge into 5 categories, like Justice Peter Gibson did?
• Is "Alice loves candies" actually necessary for "Alice loves all sweet foods"?
• Can I travel with regional trains from operators other than DB if I can "use any train" due to a schedule change?
• Solve an integral analytically
• Has technology regressed in the Alien universe?
• Genus 0 curves on surfaces and the abc conjecture
• How to cite a book if only its chapters have DOIs?
• Unreachable statement when upgrading APEX class version
• Easyjet denied EU261 compensation for flight cancellation during Crowdstrike: Any escalation or other recourse?
• What majority age is taken into consideration when travelling from country to country?
• What can cause a 24 volt solar panel to output 40 volt?
• 1 amen for 2 berachot?
• Where exactly was this picture taken?
• Definition of the electric field
• Is the oil level here too high that it needs to be drained or can I leave it?

Your browser does not support javascript. Some site functionality may not work as expected.

• Government Reports
• Books & eBooks
• Citation Help
• Writing a Literature Review
• University of Washington Libraries
• Library Guides

Physics: Writing a Literature Review

Literature reviews.

A  literature review  surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations, conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing a description, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. 

• Provide context for a research paper
• Explore the history and development of a topic
• Examine the scholarly conversation surrounding the topic
• Shows relationships between studies
• Examines gaps in research on the topic

Components 

Similar to primary research, development of the literature review requires four stages:

• Problem formulation—which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues?
• Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being explored
• Data evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic
• Analysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature

Conducting a Literature Review

1. choose a topic. define your research questions..

Your literature review should be guided by a central research question.  Remember, it is not a collection of loosely related studies in a field but instead represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor.

2. Decide on the scope of your review. 

• How many studies do you need to look at?
• How comprehensive should it be?
• How many years should it cover? 

Tip: This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.  

Make a list of the databases you will search.  

Where to find databases:

• Find Databases by Subject
• T he Find Articles tab of this guide

This page contains a list of the most relevant databases for most Physics research. 

4. Conduct your searches and find the literature. Keep track of your searches! 

• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Write down the searches you conduct in each database so that you may duplicate them if you need to later (or avoid dead-end searches   that you'd forgotten you'd already tried).
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Ask your professor or a librarian if you are missing any key works in the field.

5. Review the Literature 

Some questions to help you analyze the research: 

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions. Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited?; if so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Again, review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.

Chat with a UW Librarian

• << Previous: Citation Help
• Last Updated: Apr 7, 2024 3:23 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uw.edu/bothell/physics

Quick Links:

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals

How to write your paper

On this page, writing for a nature journal, how to write a scientific paper.

Before writing a paper, authors are advised to visit the author information pages of the journal to which they wish to submit (see this link for a  full list of Nature Portfolio publications ). Each journal has slightly different format requirements depending on readership, space, style and so on. The journal's website will contain detailed information about format, length limits, figure preparation, and similar matters. If your questions are not answered on these pages or through our recommended guidelines below, we suggest you contact the journal’s editorial office for further guidance before submitting. Contact information for the editorial offices can be found on the journal websites.

We also strongly recommend that authors read a few issues of the journal to which they wish to submit, to obtain a sense of the level, length and readership of the journal. Looking at the print issue, or at PDFs in the online edition, is particularly useful for details such as presentation of figures or style of reference numbering. (All Nature Portfolio journals have a free online issue of the journal for those who do not subscribe or have site-licence access, which can be accessed via the journal's "about" web page.)

Nature journals are international, so in writing a paper, authors should consider those readers for whom English is a second language. The journals are read mainly by professional scientists, so authors can avoid unnecessary simplification or didactic definitions. However, many readers are outside the immediate discipline of the author(s), so clarity of expression is needed to achieve the goal of comprehensibility. (See the section below for links to some websites that provide writing help and advice.)

Nature journals prefer authors to write in the active voice ("we performed the experiment...") as experience has shown that readers find concepts and results to be conveyed more clearly if written directly. We have also found that use of several adjectives to qualify one noun in highly technical language can be confusing to readers. We encourage authors to "unpackage" concepts and to present their findings and conclusions in simply constructed sentences.

Many papers submitted for publication in a Nature journal contain unnecessary technical terminology, unreadable descriptions of the work that has been done, and convoluted figure legends. Our journal subeditors and copyeditors edit the manuscript so that it is grammatically correct, logical, clear and concise. They also ensure that manuscripts use consistent search terms and terminology that is consistent with what is used in previous articles published in the journal. Of course, this process is assisted greatly if the authors have written the manuscript in a simple and accessible style, as the author is the best person to convey the message of the paper and to persuade readers that it is important enough to spend time on.

We ask authors to avoid jargon and acronyms where possible. When essential, they should be defined at first use; after first use, the author should use pronouns when possible rather than using the abbreviation or acronym at every occurrence. The acronym is second-nature to the author but is not to the reader, who may have to refer to the original definition throughout the paper when an acronym is used.

Titles need to be comprehensible and enticing to a potential reader quickly scanning a table of contents or performing an online search, while at the same time not being so general or vague as to obscure what the paper is about. We ask authors to be aware of abstracting and indexing services when devising a title for the paper: providing one or two essential keywords within a title will be beneficial for web-search results.

Within the text of papers, Nature journals use a numbering (Vancouver) system for references, not the Harvard method whereby the authors and year of publication are included in the text in parentheses. We adopt this numbering style because we believe the text flows more smoothly, and hence is quicker for the reader to absorb.

Our experience has shown that a paper's impact is maximized if it is as short as is consistent with providing a focused message, with a few crucial figures or tables. Authors can place technical information (figures, protocols, methods, tables, additional data) necessary to support their conclusion into Supplementary Information (SI), which is published online-only to accompany the published print/online paper. SI is peer-reviewed, and we believe that its use means that the impact of the conclusions of the study is enhanced by being presented in concise and focused form in the print/online journal, emphasizing the key conclusions of the research and yet providing the full supporting details required by others in the field in online-only form. We encourage authors to use SI  in this way to enhance the impact of the print/online version, and hence to increase its readership. Authors are asked to provide short "signposts" at appropriate points in their paper to indicate that SI is present to expand on a particular point (for example "for more details, see figure x in SI) so that readers can navigate easily to the relevant information.  We also encourage authors who are describing methods and protocols to provide the full details as SI.

We all face the challenge of how to make the best use of our time in an era of information overload. Judicious use of SI to ensure that the printed version of a paper is clear, comprehensible and as short as is consistent with this goal, is very likely to increase the paper's readership, impact and the number of times others cite it.

Nature Physics: the Editorial  Elements of style  explains the importance of clear and accessible writing. The advice contained within this Editorial applies to all the Nature journals.

Top of page ⤴

A number of articles and websites provide detailed guidelines and advice about writing and submitting scientific papers. Some suggested sources are:

• SciDev.Net's  Practical guides section  (including  How to submit a paper to a scientific journal  and  How to write a scientific paper )
• The Human Frontier Science Program's report  Websites and Searching for Collaborations  also contains useful writing guidelines for non-native-English speakers, as well as other helpful advice related to scientific publishing
• The classic book Elements of Style by William J. Strunk, Jr (Humphrey, New York, 1918) is now published by Bartleby.com (New York, 1999) and is  freely available on the web  in searchable format.
• Advice about how to write a Nature journal paper is provided in the Nature Physics Editorial  Elements of style .
• Advice about how to write a summary paragraph (abstract) in Nature Letter format is available as a  one-page downloadable information sheet .
• An amusing but pertinent algorithm,  How to write a paper (one possible answer) is at Nature Network's New York blog.

How can you help improve your manuscript for publication?

Presenting your work in a well-structured manuscript and in well-written English gives it its best chance for editors and reviewers to understand it and evaluate it fairly. Many researchers find that getting some independent support helps them present their results in the best possible light. The experts at Springer Nature Author Services can help you with manuscript preparation—including English language editing, developmental comments, manuscript formatting, figure preparation, translation, and more. 

Get started and save 15%

You can also use our free Grammar Check tool for an evaluation of your work.

Please note that using these tools, or any other service, is not a requirement for publication, nor does it imply or guarantee that editors will accept the article, or even select it for peer review. 

For authors from China 

 您怎么做才有助于改进您的稿件以便顺利发表？

如果在结构精巧的稿件中用精心组织的英语展示您的作品，就能最大限度地让编辑和审稿人理解并公正评估您的作品。许多研究人员发现，获得一些独立支持有助于他们以尽可能美好的方式展示他们的成果。Springer Nature Author Services 的专家可帮助您准备稿件，具体包括润色英语表述、添加有见地的注释、为稿件排版、设计图表、翻译等。 

开始使用即可节省 15% 的费用

您还可以使用我们的 免费语法检查工具 来评估您的作品。

请注意，使用这些工具或任何其他服务不是发表前必须满足的要求，也不暗示或保证相关文章定会被编辑接受（甚至未必会被选送同行评审）。

For authors from Japan

発表に備えて、論文を改善するにはどうすればよいでしょうか？

内容が適切に組み立てられ、質の高い英語で書かれた論文を投稿すれば、編集者や査読者が論文を理解し、公正に評価するための最善の機会となります。多くの研究者は、個別のサポートを受けることで、研究結果を可能な限り最高の形で発表できると思っています。Springer Nature Author Servicesのエキスパートが、英文の編集、建設的な提言、論文の書式、図の調整、翻訳など、論文の作成をサポートいたします。 

今なら15％割引でご利用いただけます

原稿の評価に、無料 の文法チェック ツールもご利用いただけます。

これらのツールや他のサービスをご利用いただくことは、論文を掲載するための要件ではありません。また、編集者が論文を受理したり、査読に選定したりすることを示唆または保証するものではないことにご注意ください。

For authors from Korea

게재를 위해 원고를 개선하려면 어떻게 해야 할까요?

여러분의 작품을 체계적인 원고로 발표하는 것은 편집자와 심사자가 여러분의 연구를 이해하고 공정하게 평가할 수 있는 최선의 기회를 제공합니다. 많은 연구자들은 어느 정도 독립적인 지원을 받는 것이 가능한 한 최선의 방법으로 자신의 결과를 발표하는 데 도움이 된다고 합니다. Springer Nature Author Services 전문가들은 영어 편집, 발전적인 논평, 원고 서식 지정, 그림 준비, 번역 등과 같은 원고 준비를 도와드릴 수 있습니다. 

지금 시작하면 15% 할인됩니다.

또한 당사의 무료 문법 검사 도구를 사용하여 여러분의 연구를 평가할 수 있습니다.

이러한 도구 또는 기타 서비스를 사용하는 것은 게재를 위한 필수 요구사항이 아니며, 편집자가 해당 논문을 수락하거나 피어 리뷰에 해당 논문을 선택한다는 것을 암시하거나 보장하지는 않습니다.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Physical Review Letters

• Collections
• Editorial Team

Editorial: Successful Letters

Physicists borrowed the word “quark” from Finnegans Wake, but James Joyce had no obvious connection to physics. Writers do not necessarily study the sciences, although many do, if their work calls for it. However, all scientists, including physicists, must know how to write. With results in hand, physicists must take an additional step and communicate these results to others.

One hundred years ago, physicists were few and funding for physics was largely private. The writing style was formal, without personal pronouns and in the passive voice. It emphasized facts and played down evidence that people were involved in research. Data were taken or calculations undertaken, analyses were performed, discoveries were made, and science advanced. As the number of physicists grew, and funding for physics came more often from public sources, it became increasingly important for physicists to convey their findings to other physicists and to the public. Recently, the medium changed from paper to pdf, but the need to communicate remains, because physics becomes more specialized and competition from other disciplines for public funding grows. Thus it is worthwhile to consider the elements that enable a paper to get its ideas across to other physicists and other scientists, to science writers in the press, and to public servants. What makes a successful Letter?

A successful Letter of course begins with a valid result, one that is important and interesting. This is glib, however, because it lacks explanations of “important” and “interesting.” So, here are attempts to define each, in single sentences: An important result provides insight that changes the way others view and understand the topic, allows them to improve their own approaches, and thus leads to substantial progress. An interesting result will make readers glad to learn of it, because it is important to their own work or the work of others, or because it is science of uncommon beauty, aesthetically. In the context of a manuscript there is a third element: accessibility. Regardless of its content, a manuscript will be of lesser interest if it is impenetrable, and a manuscript that attracts fewer readers will be less important.

Present PRL policy incorporates these three concepts by seeking to publish work that should not be missed by researchers in the given field and also those in at least some related fields. Broader interest, in general, is better, as is greater importance, but the two are not independent. Work that is extremely important to a few might be as worthy as work that is moderately important to many, which again leads directly to presentation. A manuscript that can be understood only by a narrow audience will be less likely to be suitable for PRL, because it will lose its chance to be moderately important to a wide audience.

Physicists often explain their love of research on the basis of the excitement of discovery, but in writing they may revert to the older, formal style described above. When this style meets the volume of information common in present day research, the result can be difficult to read, not to mention understand. It is of course important that a manuscript present sufficient detail to make it convincing, and authors are motivated to include detail because it shows their hard work and thoroughness. They assume this will convince referees, and editors, that a paper should be published.

It is easy, however, to include too much information. Referees and editors do not differ from other readers: all prefer interesting and digestible manuscripts. Inclusion of too much detail may lead to unfavorable reviews, via the following logic: “A Letter must be accessible. This manuscript is dense and impenetrable. It is therefore not a Letter.” To avoid this, authors must make hard choices about what information to include and what to omit. Which pieces are crucial to the discussion, and which are not needed to keep the main message intact? It is counterproductive for authors to leave this sorting as an exercise for referees and other readers. Finally, authors should consider the possibility that the level of information necessary to convey a particular result may be more than will fit in a four-page Letter.

So, once authors determine the minimum amount of information required to communicate their message, what style should they use to communicate it? Part of the answer is straightforward: expository prose, which is simple and direct, with a minimum of adjectives and adverbs. In addition, a readable manuscript should have a logical structure similar to that in any narrative. A short story, for example, sets the scene and the characters, presents conflict, provides a resolution, and ends with an epilog. These same elements make up a well-constructed scientific article. It also should be an interesting narrative, although the terminology is different. To set the scene, a scientific narrative begins with an introduction, to explain where the field stands at present. Conflict appears in the form of an unsolved problem, and resolution as the solution to the problem: the result. The epilog becomes the summary, which discusses the meaning of the result, to give readers some idea of its repercussions.

It is interesting that contributors may adhere to a dense, impersonal style in their manuscripts, but have no difficulty using another style elsewhere. Cover letters that accompany initial submittals may contain descriptions of the results, including context and potential impact, that are clearer than those in the manuscript itself. In fact, some manuscripts include no plain explanation of why the work is of interest. Author responses to negative referee reports sometimes contain narratives reminiscent of short stories (perhaps by Kafka, with particular emphasis on description of conflict). This sometimes makes for interesting reading for us editors, but does not necessarily further the cause of publication.

My hope is that the above provides some useful hints about how to tackle the difficult task of presenting inherently detailed information in an accessible style within the limited space of a Letter. The most important requirements are (1) to include only the necessary information and (2) to organize it in a smooth narrative. This editorial represents my perhaps poor attempt to meet both of these requirements. The issue of sentence-level construction is less critical, and it will not surprise me if some writers still take comfort in the passive-voice style described above. Frankly, this comfort is a mystery to me.

Reinhardt Schuhmann Managing Editor

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review Letters

• Forgot your username/password?
• Create an account

Article Lookup

Paste a citation or doi, enter a citation.

Submissions

Submission preparation checklist.

• The submission has not been previously published nor it is being considered for publication on a different journal
• The submission file is a PDF document, containing the full text, author(s) name(s) and affiliation(s), and references.
• The submission is accompanied by a Letter to the Editors with suggestions of suitable referees
• LaTeX (.tex) source files and figures (eventually, other source files like Word .docx) are also included.
• The manuscript adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.
• The authors comply with the journal's Ethical Guidelines.

Author Guidelines

Manuscripts submitted to Papers in Physics must contain substantial new results and ideas that advance in a non-trivial way our knowledge of physics.

Authors must decide at submission time the editorial treatment that Papers in Physics should give to the manuscript: traditional review or open review . Authors must ensure that any submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration.

Papers in Physics has no page limits. However, very long manuscripts are susceptible of higher publishing costs (see APC ).  Authors are encouraged to publish supplementary material at no extra cost.

Papers in Physics has a copyleft policy. Authors must agree to let the article in the public domain ( CC BY 4.0 license ). Authors must comply with the journal ethical guidelines .

EDITORIAL TREATMENTS

Traditional review In traditional review, manuscripts are submitted to anonymous reviewers seeking constructive criticism and editors make a decision as to whether publication is appropriate.

Open review In open review, manuscripts are sent to reviewers who agree to unveil their identity. If the paper is considered suitable for publication, the names of all involved will be published in the article information.  The the reviewer's comments and the author's replies may be also published together with the main article when considered valuable for the readers according to the editor in charge of the manuscript. In this way, Papers in Physics promotes open discussions of controversies among specialists that are of help to the reader and to the transparency of the editorial process. Moreover, reviewers receive their due recognition by publishing a recorded citable report.

MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION

Please, use the LaTeX class and template provided to prepare your manuscript. Microsoft Word, OpenOffice and other formats may be processed. However, note that in this case extra cost associated with formatting will be charged to the author prior to  publication (see APC ).

Language : Manuscripts must be written in English following American spelling. Title : It must be informative and brief. Authors : Use full given names or capital initials followed by periods. Family name must be written in full. Separate authors' names by commas only. Address : Provide postal address for each author. Use Arabic superscripts to link authors to addresses. Abstract : Aim at less than 500 words. Clearly indicate the system under consideration, the properties studied, the methods used and the main conclusions drawn in the paper. Text : Separate the text in sections beginning by "Introduction" and ending with "Conclusions". Figures : Use PostScript, PDF or EPS format for images. The use of color is encouraged. Introduce appropriate captions for each figure. Tables : Avoid introducing large tables; these can be submitted as Supplementary Material. Equations: Equations must be numbered sequentially. Acknowledgements: Acknowledgements to individuals and institutions must be given just before the first Appendix or the References. Appendices: Introduce as appendix any detailed material that may divert attention to the main subject in the text. References: Citations must appear numbered sequentially and in squared brackets, e.g. [2] in the text. The list of references should be placed at the end of the manuscript and contain complete information about the cited items.

Supplementary material Papers in Physics encourages authors to submit supplementary material for the benefit of reviewers and readers. These may include images, videos, lengthy tables, source codes, lengthy details of experiments, calculations or protocols, etc. Supplementary material is subjected to the same licensing as the manuscript if published.

ONLINE SUBMISSION

• Prepare a PDF version of your article to submit for reviewing. This file must contain the full text, references, figures, tables, and any other material intended to be part of the final published article.
• Prepare the LaTeX sorces and figures (packed in a single .zip or .tar.gz file) and any other supplementary material, to be uploaded as "supplementary files". Microsoft Word, OpenOffice, and other formats may be processed, but notice that the costs of format conversion will be charged to the authors.
• Detail in your cover letter the contribution made by each author of the manuscript. This is important to help the Editors in overseeing compliance with the journal ethical guidelines .
• Include in your cover letter a list of colleagues that you believe are suitable as reviewers of your manuscript. Please, include as many as possible and provide: full names, affiliations and email addresses.
• When entering title and abstract in the submission process use LaTeX commands for special symbols and formulas, e.g., $\sqrt{2}$.

Sample of cover letter (in the submission process this can be entered in the Comments to the Editor box)

Dear Editor,

Please, consider the following when handling this submission.

Contributions: Authors A and B designed and performed the experiment, Author C developed the theoretical calculations, Author D performed the statistical analysis, all authors contributted equaly to the preparation of the manuscript.

Suitable reviewers: Dr. Andrew Smith, University of Physics (Amsterdam, The Netherlands), [email protected] Prof. Bry Chan, Physics Institute (Colorado, USA), [email protected]

POST EDITION

After acceptance, manuscripts are reviewed by our Copyeditors for English and style correctness. A correction marked ("redline") copyedited manuscript is sent to the corresponding author for approval. Later on, proof are processed and authors are invited to reply withing 48 hours (only typo corrections are accepted upon proofs).

Copyright Notice

Authors agree to the PIP Copyleft Notice

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

open_access_cc_logos

general_info

eISSN 1852-4249

MANUSCRIPT SUBMISSION

FOCUS AND SCOPE

EDITORIAL TEAM

EDITORIAL OFFICE

ETHICAL GUIDELINES

Follow @PapersInPhysics

Tweets by PapersInPhysics

All material published in this site is licenced under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License .

Papers in Physics Centro Atómico Bariloche Av. Bustillo 9500, 8400 San Carlos de Bariloche ARGENTINA [email protected] phone: +54 294 4445100 (ext. 5396)

Support by Cultural Hosting

How to Publish in a Physics Journal As a Physics Major

Full Chapter List - So You Want To Be A Physicist... Series

Part I: Early Physics Education in High schools Part II: Surviving the First Year of College Part III: Mathematical Preparations Part IV: The Life of a Physics Major Part V: Applying for Graduate School Part VI: What to Expect from Graduate School Before You Get There Part VII: The US Graduate School System Part VIII: Alternative Careers for a Physics Grad Part VIIIa: Entering Physics Graduate School From Another Major Part IX: First years of Graduate School from Being a TA to the Graduate Exams Part X: Choosing a Research area and an advisor Part XI: Initiating Research Work Part XII: Research work and The Lab Book Part XIII: Publishing in a Physics Journal Part XIV: Oral Presentations Part XIII: Publishing in a Physics Journal (Addendum) Part XIV: Oral Presentations – Addendum Part XV – Writing Your Doctoral Thesis/Desertation Part XVI – Your Thesis Defense Part XVII – Getting a Job! Part XVIII – Postdoctoral Position Part XIX – Your Curriculum Vitae

At this stage, you are well into your Ph.D. research work, and depending on what area of physics you are in, you may already start producing new results. This next part of the series will cover an extremely important aspect of your graduate work that is typically not covered (sometimes not even required) in your graduate school requirement. It is the aspect of publicizing your work. Your graduate school curriculum will not have much, if any, on this. Yet, as a physicist, this is one of the most important aspects of your profession.

There are two major means by which physicists publicize and report their work – via physics journals, and presentation at physics conferences. In this chapter, I will first cover journal publications and will reserve a conference presentation for the next chapter.

If you have ventured into your library, you will notice that there are hundreds of physics-related journals or journals that accept physics papers. While a lot of these journals tend to specialize in a particular area of physics, three journals are considered to be very prestigious for physics publications: Nature, Science, and the Physical Review Letters. Nature and Science publishes scientific papers in general, not just physics. They also tend to be extremely selective about what appears on their pages. One criterion is that the work being reported must have widespread appeal or importance, not just within the confines of that particular area of study. So things that claim a discovery of never-observed phenomena, such as fermionic condensates, or apparent superluminal group velocity propagation, are the types that the editors of these journals look for. This criterion adds to the difficulty in getting published in these journals. In many cases, manuscripts submitted to these journals do not even get past the editors. They are often rejected before the manuscripts reach the referees. Phys. Rev. Lett. publishes exclusively physics and physics-related papers. Because of this, they tend to publish more physics papers per week than Science and Nature combined. But they are no less difficult to get through. The editors, while still more forgiving than the editors of Science and Nature, will ramp up their review of the submitted manuscripts and will be more discriminating of what they sent to their reviewers. Now unlike Science and Nature, Phys. Rev. Lett. has a page limit of 4 typeset pages. So articles submitted to be published in this journal will have to be able to convey their messages within that limit.

I will now describe the typical process that one goes through in trying to get one’s work published in a physics journal. Since the largest ”family” of physics journals is the Physical Review series, I will use the process of getting published in one of these journals as a concrete example. However, the method is quite generic and can be adapted to any reputable physics journal. To publish a work, you need to be very clear what is the single, most important message you are trying to get across. Once you, your adviser, and your collaborators agree on that message, it is time to figure out how to convey that in the most effective and CONVINCING manner. Figure out what results must be included, what data must be presented, what figures are needed, and how to show all of these in the clearest possible manner. There is no point in having an important thing to say, but saying it in a confusing, obtuse manner that makes it difficult to understand. Your message will tend to be lost, not only to the reader but more importantly, to the people who will review your work. This is a formula for rejection.

Once you have decided what to present, you will have to decide where you might submit such a work. Note that in many instances, this is often decided later, after the manuscript is written. However, more often than not, your adviser and collaborators will know how significant the work is, and will already have some idea in mind on which journal to aim for. If this is the case, go to the journal website, and look for instructions from the authors. The journal will have a clear set of guidelines on the format that it will accept for submission. Often, they also will have a template that one can use as a guide. This is especially helpful because it can allow you to typeset your manuscript to look like it would appear in the final print. It allows you to judge the length of your paper, which is important for journals like Phys. Rev. Lett. which has a page limit. You should already be familiar with the journal you want to submit to. All that literature search that you did while trying to familiarize yourself with the field of study that you went into (see an earlier So You Want To Be A Physicist chapter) should make you comfortable with many physics journals. So look at a paper from that journal and pay attention to how the authors present their work. This will be a very good illustration of what works.

Now that you know what to write, where to send it to, and how to present it, it is time to write. This is where you will regret all those complaints you had in your writing classes. It is most likely that if you were the one who did the significant portion of the work you would be the one to write it. All journals require that the manuscript requires an abstract, an introduction, the body of the work, and possibly a conclusion or summary at the end. This is true even if there are no structured sections that are part of the style given by the journal. Such things are helpful for people who want to do a quick browse of a paper. When you have understood this, then write! Keep in mind one unavoidable fact: your manuscript WILL go through several iterations before everyone involved will agree to it. This happens to everyone, no matter how many times we write and publish our papers. You will learn that different people prefer certain phrases, emphasis, style, etc. Do not be discouraged by this. Discuss why you think certain things should be said in certain ways (for example: Why should you not say ”this result proves that…” rather than ”.. this result is consistent with…”). You will learn how certain words and phrases can cause problems during the review process that you may not anticipate. These are all things that you will pick up along the way as you write your first, and subsequent papers. There’s no way to learn other than by doing it yourself.

Note that it is not unusual for several people to share writing the manuscript. Maybe someone will write one part of it, and you write another part, while your adviser writes the rest. However, what is more, common is to have just one person starting by writing the first version, and then it gets passed around to several people for corrections, additions, modifications, etc. I find this to be more efficient than the first, and the paper tends to at least be more coherent as a whole rather than a mishmash of different styles.

Physics papers tend to have figures, especially graphs. You need to have good graphing software. This goes without saying. You will also need to be aware that the figures tend to be rather small when it appear in print. So make sure your letters and numbers will be legible when they are compressed to the typical size of that journal. This is where having a template from the journal and inserting the figures yourself can be useful. You can see how it may appear in the end and see for yourself if you need to make certain things bigger/clearer. See if your figures have too much clutter that someone who is not familiar with your work will find it difficult to decipher what you are trying to convey. Always keep in mind that you are trying to convey some information to someone who is not familiar with what you are doing. Being brief and right to the point is always important.

Unless you are Albert Einstein, your paper will have references. Again, look at a paper from that journal to see the format of how references are cited. However, more importantly, you need to make sure you did not miss an important work that needs to be cited. This is where your adviser will be useful. He/she will probably know what you should include in your citations. If you don’t, don’t be surprised if the referee will come back and ask you why you missed so-and-so. This is where, if you had followed the earlier advice on doing an extensive literature search, you would have known who did what when, and why such a thing needs to be included. Be aware that you can ruffle a few feathers if you leave out something you should have cited. The people who are also in your field will tend to remember that you neglected to cite their work when it was appropriate to do so. They might just do the same when it is their turn. You do not want to put the wrong foot out especially when you’re just starting. So do your homework.

Who to list as the authors on your manuscript is initially the decision of your supervisor/adviser. If you did the work, and are the primary writer, you should be listed as the first author. However, this rule is not followed all the time. Sometimes, unfortunately, it is a matter of politics on who gets listed, and where. Typically, those who did the most work get listed first, and the list follows the degree of contribution to that work.

[Addendum to the original article – In experimental high-energy physics papers, the number of people participating in the work can be HUGE, often more than a hundred. It is usually difficult to pick a single person who did more work than others in such a collaboration. So for such papers, the authors are listed alphabetically using their last names.]

I suppose this is also the place to tell you that if you do not know how to write LaTex codes, this is the time to learn. The Physical Review journals, especially, prefer LaTex format as the submission document, while the figures have to be in postscript (PS) or encapsulated postscript (EPS) files. Several graphical Tex editors allow you to type your document and mathematical equations very easily (the FULL version of MathType Equation Editor that comes with Word can convert equations into LaTex codes). So you don’t have to learn that much. Note that if you submit your documents in the format that they prefer, you get discounted publication fees for Physical Review journals (more on this later).

When you are ready with a final manuscript, it’s time to submit it. All of the major journals now prefer electronic submission. Go to the journal’s website for explicit instructions. Once you have submitted your manuscript, you will be given a manuscript or submission code. This is the reference number you and the editors refer to whenever there are communications between the two parties. It is also the code that the referees are given if and when your manuscript is evaluated. The editors will determine if your manuscript satisfies the standard requirement for the journal. If it does, it will be submitted to either one or more than one referee. For journals such as Science, Nature, and Phys. Rev. Lett., 2 referees are normal, 3 is not unusual, and 4 or 5 is not unheard of. These referees are anonymous to you, the author. On the Physical Review author’s webpage, you can track the progress of your manuscript and at what stage it is in. So you can tell if it has been sent to the referees, and when the referees have responded to the editors.

The responses from the referees determine the next step that you have to take. There are several possible outcomes:

(i) ALL the referees give a positive review and agree that your manuscript deserves to be published. You may need to make minor changes, but overall, it is accepted. Then congratulations! The editors will give you instructions on what you need to do if you have to make minor modifications, etc. But don’t get used to this. This doesn’t occur often. More likely what would happen is an option (ii)

(ii) which is one referee has a set of comments/questions, but gives a positive review, while the other referee doesn’t give a positive review and also has comments/questions. When this occurs, you will have a chance to submit a rebuttal and make changes to your manuscript to take into account the referees’ comments, suggestions, etc. I strongly suggest you make a much of an attempt to accommodate the referees’ suggestions. It will show that you respect their opinions and may make the 2nd round of review smoother. You then resubmit your manuscript and usually, the same referees will get to review it again unless one or more of the referees refuse to review it again for some reason (this has happened before to yours truly). If all goes well, you’ll get positive reviews and your paper is accepted. But it can happen that even after the 2nd round, you still do not get unanimous approval. When this occurs, you need to pay close attention to the journal’s policy. Most journals would view this as an automatic rejection. You might as well try to submit your manuscript to another journal. Some journals, such as the Physical Review journals, will give you the final option of appealing to the associate editor. You’d better have an extremely good reason to do this because it will again take some time for the process to occur and you want to get your work published in that particular journal.

(iii) you get all negative reviews on the first round. This again will usually result in an automatic rejection. You can appeal or send in a rebuttal, but there’s a good chance you won’t get through if the editors see that all the referees agree that it shouldn’t be published. If this occurs, my advice is to go to a different journal.

Writing papers is a necessary part of your career as a physicist. Many started with a series of publications by the time they completed their Ph.D. work. You need to establish your reputation by the time you graduate, to make your credentials stronger in your search for a post-doctoral position or employment. Your adviser should help you in making sure you have a few publications under your belt by the time you are done. So such an exercise is a necessary practice in becoming a physicist . You should not be satisfied with your graduate work until you have at least a publication to your name.

PhD Physics

Accelerator physics, photocathodes, field-enhancement. tunneling spectroscopy, superconductivity

You might also like

Sometimes I found papers accompanied by a supplementary material, in whcih usually the author elaborates his method and/or derivations to the formulae appearing in the main paper. Is there also limitation on the number of page of the supplementary material?As mfb said, it depends on the journal. Often the supplementary part is available only online, it isn't refereed, and it is usually minimally formatted and typeset. This means that the cost, if any, to the journal is minimal. So I doubt that it counts as part of the publication fee. How that is handled in journals such as PRL that has a strict page limit, I'm not sure.

If the supplementary material is managed by the journal, it might depend on the journal. In high-energy physics (probably elsewhere as well but I don't know) this material is available independently of the journal, so there is no page limit. Sometimes you even get an internal support note for a public support note, which can have 200+ pages.

Sometimes I found papers accompanied by a supplementary material, in whcih usually the author elaborates his method and/or derivations to the formulae appearing in the main paper. Is there also limitation on the number of page of the supplementary material?

These are all things that you will pick up along the way as you write your first, and subsequent papers. There’s no way to learn other than by doing it yourself.Get paper drafts from others and review them, then discuss your comments with others. This is always done in experimental particle physics within the collaborations, but it is possible elsewhere too.

Physics papers tend to have figures, especially graphs…. and you should be able to change elements in the graph easily (i. e. not with photoshop) because you probably have to do so between the first draft and the final paper. [Addendum to the original article – In experimental high energy physics papers, the number of people participating in the work can be HUGE, often more than a hundred. It is usually difficult to pick a single person who did more work than others in such a collaboration. So for such papers, the authors are listed alphabatically using their last names.]For the same reason, it is also typical that the collaborations maintain a single author list. Everyone on that list gets listed as author for every paper, regardless of the contribution to this specific paper.

Preprint servers could be worth a note, given their importance in some fields.

Leave a Reply

Leave a reply cancel reply.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

The Fall cohort application deadline is August 25, 2024.  

Click here to apply.

Featured Posts

The Citizen Entrepreneurship Competition for High Schoolers - 8 Pros and Cons You Should Consider

10 University Programs for Middle School Students

Northwestern University's Summer Programs for Middle School Students - Are They Worth It?

10 Internships for High School Students in Seattle

25 Research Ideas in Physics for High School Students

Research can be a valued supplement in your college application. However, many high schoolers are yet to explore research , which is a delicate process that may include choosing a topic, reviewing literature, conducting experiments, and writing a paper.

If you are interested in physics, exploring the physics realm through research is a great way to not only navigate your passion but learn about what research entails. Physics even branches out into other fields such as biology, chemistry, and math, so interest in physics is not a requirement to doing research in physics. Having research experience on your resume can be a great way to boost your college application and show independence, passion, ambition, and intellectual curiosity !

We will cover what exactly a good research topic entails and then provide you with 25 possible physics research topics that may interest or inspire you.

What is a good research topic?

Of course, you want to choose a topic that you are interested in. But beyond that, you should choose a topic that is relevant today ; for example, research questions that have already been answered after extensive research does not address a current knowledge gap . Make sure to also be cautious that your topic is not too broad that you are trying to cover too much ground and end up losing the details, but not too specific that you are unable to gather enough information.

Remember that topics can span across fields. You do not need to restrict yourself to a physics topic; you can conduct interdisciplinary research combining physics with other fields you may be interested in.

Research Ideas in Physics

We have compiled a list of 25 possible physics research topics suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors. These topics are separated into 8 broader categories.

Topic #1 : Using computational technologies and analyses

If you are interested in coding or technology in general , physics is also one place to look to explore these fields. You can explore anything from new technologies to datasets (even with coding) through a physics lens. Some computational or technological physics topics you can research are:

1.Development of computer programs to find and track positions of fast-moving nanoparticles and nanomachines

2. Features and limitations to augmented and virtual reality technologies, current industry standards of performance, and solutions that have been proposed to address challenges

3. Use of MATLAB or Python to work with existing code bases to design structures that trap light for interaction with qubits

4. Computational analysis of ATLAS open data using Python or C++

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at University of Cambridge, University of Rochester, and Harvard University.

Topic #2 : Exploration of astrophysical and cosmological phenomena

Interested in space? Then astrophysics and cosmology may be just for you. There are lots of unanswered questions about astrophysical and cosmological phenomena that you can begin to answer. Here are some possible physics topics in these particular subfields that you can look into:

5. Cosmological mysteries (like dark energy, inflation, dark matter) and their hypothesized explanations

6. Possible future locations of detectors for cosmology and astrophysics research

7. Physical processes that shape galaxies through cosmic time in the context of extragalactic astronomy and the current issues and frontiers in galaxy evolution

8. Interaction of beyond-standard-model particles with astrophysical structures (such as black holes and Bose stars)

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at Princeton University, Harvard University, Yale University, and University of California, Irvine.

Topic #3 : Mathematical analyses of physical phenomena

Math is deeply embedded in physics. Even if you may not be interested solely in physics, there are lots of mathematical applications and questions that you may be curious about. Using basic physics laws, you can learn how to derive your own mathematical equations and solve them in hopes that they address a current knowledge gap in physics. Some examples of topics include:

9. Analytical approximation and numerical solving of equations that determine the evolution of different particles after the Big Bang

10. Mathematical derivation of the dynamics of particles from fundamental laws (such as special relativity, general relativity, quantum mechanics)

11. The basics of Riemannian geometry and how simple geometrical arguments can be used to construct the ingredients of Einstein’s equations of general relativity that relate the curvature of space-time with energy-mass

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at Harvard University, University of Southampton, and Pennsylvania State University.

Topic #4 : Nuclear applications in physics

Nuclear science and its possible benefits and implications are important topics to explore and understand in today’s society, which often uses nuclear energy. One possible nuclear physics topic to look into is:

12. Radiation or radiation measurement in applications of nuclear physics (such as reactors, nuclear batteries, sensors/detectors)

Suggested by a Lumiere PhD mentor at University of Chicago.

Topic #5 : Analyzing biophysical data

Biology and even medicine are applicable fields in physics. Using physics to figure out how to improve biology research or understand biological systems is common. Some biophysics topics to research may include the following:

13. Simulation of biological systems using data science techniques to analyze biological data sets

14. Design and construction of DNA nanomachines that operate in liquid environments

15. Representation and decomposition of MEG/EEG brain signals using fundamental electricity and magnetism concepts

16. Use of novel methods to make better images in the context of biology and obtain high resolution images of biological samples

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at University of Oxford, University of Cambridge, University of Washington, and University of Rochester

Topic #6 : Identifying electrical and mechanical properties

Even engineering has great applications in the field of physics. There are different phenomena in physics from cells to Boson particles with interesting electrical and/or mechanical properties. If you are interested in electrical or mechanical engineering or even just the basics , these are some related physics topics:

17. Simulations of how cells react to electrical and mechanical stimuli

18. The best magneto-hydrodynamic drive for high electrical permittivity fluids

19. The electrical and thermodynamic properties of Boson particles, whose quantum nature is responsible for laser radiation

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at Johns Hopkins University, Cornell University, and Harvard University.

Topic #7 : Quantum properties and theories

Quantum physics studies science at the most fundamental level , and there are many questions yet to be answered. Although there have been recent breakthroughs in the quantum physics field, there are still many undiscovered sub areas that you can explore. These are possible quantum physics research topics:

20. The recent theoretical and experimental advances in the quantum computing field (such as Google’s recent breakthrough result) and explore current high impact research directions for quantum computing from a hardware or theoretical perspective

21. Discovery a new undiscovered composite particle called toponium and how to utilize data from detectors used to observe proton collisions for discoveries

22. Describing a black hole and its quantum properties geometrically as a curvature of space-time and how studying these properties can potentially solve the singularity problem

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at Stanford University, Purdue University, University of Cambridge, and Cornell University.

Topic #8 : Renewable energy and climate change solutions

Climate change is an urgent issue , and you can use physics to research environmental topics ranging from renewable energies to global temperature increases . Some ideas of environmentally related physics research topics are:

23. New materials for the production of hydrogen fuel

24. Analysis of emissions involved in the production, use, and disposal of products

25. Nuclear fission or nuclear fusion energy as possible solutions to mitigate climate change

Suggested by Lumiere PhD mentors at Northwestern University and Princeton University.

If you’re looking for a competitive mentored research program in subjects like data science, machine learning, political theory, biology, and chemistry, consider applying to Horizon’s Research Seminars and Labs ! 

This is a selective virtual research program that lets you engage in advanced research and develop a research paper in a subject of your choosing. Horizon has worked with 1000+ high school students so far, and offers 600+ research specializations for you to choose from. 

You can find the application link here

If you are passionate or even curious about physics and would like to do research and learn more, consider applying to the Lumiere Research Scholar Program , which is a selective online high school program for students interested in researching with the help of mentors. You can find the application form here .

Rachel is a first year at Harvard University concentrating in neuroscience. She is passionate about health policy and educational equity, and she enjoys traveling and dancing.

Image source: Stock image

CLASSE stands for C ornell L aboratory for A ccelerator-based S cience S and E ducation

Theoretical Particle Physics Overview

The Standard Model (SM) of strong, electromagnetic and weak interactions is the crowning achievement of twentieth century physics. However, despite its many spectacular successes, the SM is theoretically inconsistent at high energies and should be superseded by a new, more fundamental theory at the teraelectron-volt (TeV) energy scale. In addition, the SM cannot incorporate dark matter, whose existence has been confirmed by numerous astrophysical observations.

Many theoretical ideas about the physics at the TeV scale and the nature of dark matter have been proposed; examples include supersymmetry, extra dimensions of space, and new strong interactions. Members of Cornell theory group are active in investigating these ideas and their experimental and observational consequences. Currently, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at the CERN laboratory in Switzerland is exploring the TeV scale experimentally for the first time in history. Theoretical interpretation of the LHC data is expected to be a major focus of research in the next few years. In this work, Cornell theorists benefit from traditionally close connections with the LEPP experimental group , which participates in the CMS experiment at the LHC.

Another research area actively pursued at Cornell is string theory, which combines quantum field theory and gravity in a consistent framework. A key goal is to understand the properties of the four-dimensional effective theories derived from compactifications of string theory. Cornell theorists create new analytical techniques for the study of flux compactifications, use these tools to find novel solutions of supergravity, and then characterize the resulting effective actions. A primary application of these methods is in the study of the very early universe: questions about inflation can often be mapped into questions about the geometry of the internal space or about the potential governing deformations of this space. Theorists at Cornell have led the exploration of the interface between string theory and inflationary cosmology, which holds the prospect of bringing string theory into contact with cosmological observations.

Particle theory students at Cornell have the opportunity to explore a wide range of research areas, ranging from experiment-driven theory to highly mathematical analyses of supersymmetric field theories or quantum theories of gravity. There is also work at the interface between condensed matter physics and particle physics, where mathematical and numerical techniques from relativistic quantum field theory are adapted for use on condensed matter systems, and ideas from condensed matter physics are applied to quantum field theories. Work can be analytical, or it can be computational, as in numerical simulations of quantum chromodynamics and other quantum field theories—a research area invented at Cornell. The particle theory program is very flexible: it is easy for theory students to work in more than one area, and it is not unusual for a student to co-author papers with more than one professor during their graduate career. In addition, there is close collaboration with Cornell’s theoretical astrophysics group, focused on problems of common interest to particle physics and astrophysics/cosmology.

Title Page Setup

A title page is required for all APA Style papers. There are both student and professional versions of the title page. Students should use the student version of the title page unless their instructor or institution has requested they use the professional version. APA provides a student title page guide (PDF, 199KB) to assist students in creating their title pages.

Student title page

The student title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation, course number and name for which the paper is being submitted, instructor name, assignment due date, and page number, as shown in this example.

Title page setup is covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 2.3 and the Concise Guide Section 1.6

Related handouts

• Student Title Page Guide (PDF, 263KB)
• Student Paper Setup Guide (PDF, 3MB)

Student papers do not include a running head unless requested by the instructor or institution.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the student title page.

Professional title page

The professional title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation(s), author note, running head, and page number, as shown in the following example.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the professional title page.

How to Write a Research Proposal: (with Examples & Templates)

Table of Contents

Before conducting a study, a research proposal should be created that outlines researchers’ plans and methodology and is submitted to the concerned evaluating organization or person. Creating a research proposal is an important step to ensure that researchers are on track and are moving forward as intended. A research proposal can be defined as a detailed plan or blueprint for the proposed research that you intend to undertake. It provides readers with a snapshot of your project by describing what you will investigate, why it is needed, and how you will conduct the research.  

Your research proposal should aim to explain to the readers why your research is relevant and original, that you understand the context and current scenario in the field, have the appropriate resources to conduct the research, and that the research is feasible given the usual constraints.  

This article will describe in detail the purpose and typical structure of a research proposal , along with examples and templates to help you ace this step in your research journey.  

What is a Research Proposal ?  

A research proposal¹ ,²  can be defined as a formal report that describes your proposed research, its objectives, methodology, implications, and other important details. Research proposals are the framework of your research and are used to obtain approvals or grants to conduct the study from various committees or organizations. Consequently, research proposals should convince readers of your study’s credibility, accuracy, achievability, practicality, and reproducibility.   

With research proposals , researchers usually aim to persuade the readers, funding agencies, educational institutions, and supervisors to approve the proposal. To achieve this, the report should be well structured with the objectives written in clear, understandable language devoid of jargon. A well-organized research proposal conveys to the readers or evaluators that the writer has thought out the research plan meticulously and has the resources to ensure timely completion.  

Purpose of Research Proposals  

A research proposal is a sales pitch and therefore should be detailed enough to convince your readers, who could be supervisors, ethics committees, universities, etc., that what you’re proposing has merit and is feasible . Research proposals can help students discuss their dissertation with their faculty or fulfill course requirements and also help researchers obtain funding. A well-structured proposal instills confidence among readers about your ability to conduct and complete the study as proposed.  

Research proposals can be written for several reasons:³  

• To describe the importance of research in the specific topic  
• Address any potential challenges you may encounter  
• Showcase knowledge in the field and your ability to conduct a study  
• Apply for a role at a research institute  
• Convince a research supervisor or university that your research can satisfy the requirements of a degree program  
• Highlight the importance of your research to organizations that may sponsor your project  
• Identify implications of your project and how it can benefit the audience  

What Goes in a Research Proposal?    

Research proposals should aim to answer the three basic questions—what, why, and how.  

The What question should be answered by describing the specific subject being researched. It should typically include the objectives, the cohort details, and the location or setting.  

The Why question should be answered by describing the existing scenario of the subject, listing unanswered questions, identifying gaps in the existing research, and describing how your study can address these gaps, along with the implications and significance.  

The How question should be answered by describing the proposed research methodology, data analysis tools expected to be used, and other details to describe your proposed methodology.   

Research Proposal Example  

Here is a research proposal sample template (with examples) from the University of Rochester Medical Center. 4 The sections in all research proposals are essentially the same although different terminology and other specific sections may be used depending on the subject.  

Structure of a Research Proposal  

If you want to know how to make a research proposal impactful, include the following components:¹  

1. Introduction  

This section provides a background of the study, including the research topic, what is already known about it and the gaps, and the significance of the proposed research.  

2. Literature review  

This section contains descriptions of all the previous relevant studies pertaining to the research topic. Every study cited should be described in a few sentences, starting with the general studies to the more specific ones. This section builds on the understanding gained by readers in the Introduction section and supports it by citing relevant prior literature, indicating to readers that you have thoroughly researched your subject.  

3. Objectives  

Once the background and gaps in the research topic have been established, authors must now state the aims of the research clearly. Hypotheses should be mentioned here. This section further helps readers understand what your study’s specific goals are.  

4. Research design and methodology  

Here, authors should clearly describe the methods they intend to use to achieve their proposed objectives. Important components of this section include the population and sample size, data collection and analysis methods and duration, statistical analysis software, measures to avoid bias (randomization, blinding), etc.  

5. Ethical considerations  

This refers to the protection of participants’ rights, such as the right to privacy, right to confidentiality, etc. Researchers need to obtain informed consent and institutional review approval by the required authorities and mention this clearly for transparency.  

6. Budget/funding  

Researchers should prepare their budget and include all expected expenditures. An additional allowance for contingencies such as delays should also be factored in.  

7. Appendices  

This section typically includes information that supports the research proposal and may include informed consent forms, questionnaires, participant information, measurement tools, etc.  

8. Citations  

Important Tips for Writing a Research Proposal  

Writing a research proposal begins much before the actual task of writing. Planning the research proposal structure and content is an important stage, which if done efficiently, can help you seamlessly transition into the writing stage. 3,5  

The Planning Stage  

• Manage your time efficiently. Plan to have the draft version ready at least two weeks before your deadline and the final version at least two to three days before the deadline.
• What is the primary objective of your research?  
• Will your research address any existing gap?  
• What is the impact of your proposed research?  
• Do people outside your field find your research applicable in other areas?  
• If your research is unsuccessful, would there still be other useful research outcomes?  

  The Writing Stage  

• Create an outline with main section headings that are typically used.  
• Focus only on writing and getting your points across without worrying about the format of the research proposal , grammar, punctuation, etc. These can be fixed during the subsequent passes. Add details to each section heading you created in the beginning.   
• Ensure your sentences are concise and use plain language. A research proposal usually contains about 2,000 to 4,000 words or four to seven pages.  
• Don’t use too many technical terms and abbreviations assuming that the readers would know them. Define the abbreviations and technical terms.  
• Ensure that the entire content is readable. Avoid using long paragraphs because they affect the continuity in reading. Break them into shorter paragraphs and introduce some white space for readability.  
• Focus on only the major research issues and cite sources accordingly. Don’t include generic information or their sources in the literature review.  
• Proofread your final document to ensure there are no grammatical errors so readers can enjoy a seamless, uninterrupted read.  
• Use academic, scholarly language because it brings formality into a document.  
• Ensure that your title is created using the keywords in the document and is neither too long and specific nor too short and general.  
• Cite all sources appropriately to avoid plagiarism.  
• Make sure that you follow guidelines, if provided. This includes rules as simple as using a specific font or a hyphen or en dash between numerical ranges.  
• Ensure that you’ve answered all questions requested by the evaluating authority.  

Key Takeaways   

Here’s a summary of the main points about research proposals discussed in the previous sections:  

• A research proposal is a document that outlines the details of a proposed study and is created by researchers to submit to evaluators who could be research institutions, universities, faculty, etc.  
• Research proposals are usually about 2,000-4,000 words long, but this depends on the evaluating authority’s guidelines.  
• A good research proposal ensures that you’ve done your background research and assessed the feasibility of the research.  
• Research proposals have the following main sections—introduction, literature review, objectives, methodology, ethical considerations, and budget.  

Frequently Asked Questions  

Q1. How is a research proposal evaluated?  

A1. In general, most evaluators, including universities, broadly use the following criteria to evaluate research proposals . 6  

• Significance —Does the research address any important subject or issue, which may or may not be specific to the evaluator or university?  
• Content and design —Is the proposed methodology appropriate to answer the research question? Are the objectives clear and well aligned with the proposed methodology?  
• Sample size and selection —Is the target population or cohort size clearly mentioned? Is the sampling process used to select participants randomized, appropriate, and free of bias?  
• Timing —Are the proposed data collection dates mentioned clearly? Is the project feasible given the specified resources and timeline?  
• Data management and dissemination —Who will have access to the data? What is the plan for data analysis?  

Q2. What is the difference between the Introduction and Literature Review sections in a research proposal ?  

A2. The Introduction or Background section in a research proposal sets the context of the study by describing the current scenario of the subject and identifying the gaps and need for the research. A Literature Review, on the other hand, provides references to all prior relevant literature to help corroborate the gaps identified and the research need.  

Q3. How long should a research proposal be?  

A3. Research proposal lengths vary with the evaluating authority like universities or committees and also the subject. Here’s a table that lists the typical research proposal lengths for a few universities.  

Q4. What are the common mistakes to avoid in a research proposal ?  

A4. Here are a few common mistakes that you must avoid while writing a research proposal . 7  

• No clear objectives: Objectives should be clear, specific, and measurable for the easy understanding among readers.  
• Incomplete or unconvincing background research: Background research usually includes a review of the current scenario of the particular industry and also a review of the previous literature on the subject. This helps readers understand your reasons for undertaking this research because you identified gaps in the existing research.  
• Overlooking project feasibility: The project scope and estimates should be realistic considering the resources and time available.   
• Neglecting the impact and significance of the study: In a research proposal , readers and evaluators look for the implications or significance of your research and how it contributes to the existing research. This information should always be included.  
• Unstructured format of a research proposal : A well-structured document gives confidence to evaluators that you have read the guidelines carefully and are well organized in your approach, consequently affirming that you will be able to undertake the research as mentioned in your proposal.  
• Ineffective writing style: The language used should be formal and grammatically correct. If required, editors could be consulted, including AI-based tools such as Paperpal , to refine the research proposal structure and language.  

Thus, a research proposal is an essential document that can help you promote your research and secure funds and grants for conducting your research. Consequently, it should be well written in clear language and include all essential details to convince the evaluators of your ability to conduct the research as proposed.  

This article has described all the important components of a research proposal and has also provided tips to improve your writing style. We hope all these tips will help you write a well-structured research proposal to ensure receipt of grants or any other purpose.  

References  

• Sudheesh K, Duggappa DR, Nethra SS. How to write a research proposal? Indian J Anaesth. 2016;60(9):631-634. Accessed July 15, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/  
• Writing research proposals. Harvard College Office of Undergraduate Research and Fellowships. Harvard University. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://uraf.harvard.edu/apply-opportunities/app-components/essays/research-proposals  
• What is a research proposal? Plus how to write one. Indeed website. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/research-proposal  
• Research proposal template. University of Rochester Medical Center. Accessed July 16, 2024. https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/MediaLibraries/URMCMedia/pediatrics/research/documents/Research-proposal-Template.pdf  
• Tips for successful proposal writing. Johns Hopkins University. Accessed July 17, 2024. https://research.jhu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Tips-for-Successful-Proposal-Writing.pdf  
• Formal review of research proposals. Cornell University. Accessed July 18, 2024. https://irp.dpb.cornell.edu/surveys/survey-assessment-review-group/research-proposals  
• 7 Mistakes you must avoid in your research proposal. Aveksana (via LinkedIn). Accessed July 17, 2024. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/7-mistakes-you-must-avoid-your-research-proposal-aveksana-cmtwf/  

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

How to write a phd research proposal.

• What are the Benefits of Generative AI for Academic Writing?
• How to Avoid Plagiarism When Using Generative AI Tools
• What is Hedging in Academic Writing?  

How to Write Your Research Paper in APA Format

The future of academia: how ai tools are changing the way we do research, you may also like, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide), maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements.

Free Al Office Suite with PDF Editor

Edit Word, Excel, and PPT for FREE.

Read, edit, and convert PDFs with the powerful PDF toolkit.

Microsoft-like interface, easy to use.

Windows • MacOS • Linux • iOS • Android

• Articles of Word

How to Write a Research Paper [Steps & Examples]

As a student, you are often required to complete numerous academic tasks, which can demand a lot of extra effort. Writing a research paper is one of these tasks. If researching for the topic isn't challenging enough, writing it down in a specific format adds another layer of difficulty. Having gone through this myself, I want to help you have a smoother journey in writing your research paper. I'll guide you through everything you need to know about writing a research paper, including how to write a research paper and all the necessary factors you need to consider while writing one.

Order for Preparation of your research paper

Before beginning your research paper, start planning how you will organize your paper. Follow the specific order I have laid out to ensure you assemble everything correctly, cover all necessary components, and write more effectively. This method will help you avoid missing important elements and improve the overall quality of your paper.

Figures and Tables

Assemble all necessary visual aids to support your data and findings. Ensure they are labeled correctly and referenced appropriately in your text.

Detail the procedures and techniques used in your research. This section should be thorough enough to allow others to replicate your study.

Summarize the findings of your research without interpretation. Use figures and tables to illustrate your data clearly.

Interpret the results, discussing their implications and how they relate to your research question. Address any limitations and suggest areas for future research.

Summarize the key points of your research, restating the significance of your findings and their broader impact.

Introduction

Introduce the topic, provide background information, and state the research problem or hypothesis. Explain the purpose and scope of your study.

Write a concise summary of your research, including the objective, methods, results, and conclusion. Keep it brief and to the point.

Create a clear and informative title that accurately reflects the content and focus of your research paper.

Identify key terms related to your research that will help others find your paper in searches.

Acknowledgements

Thank those who contributed to your research, including funding sources, advisors, and any other significant supporters.

Compile a complete list of all sources cited in your paper, formatted according to the required citation style. Ensure every reference is accurate and complete.

Types of Research Papers

There are multiple types of research papers, each with distinct characteristics, purposes, and structures. Knowing which type of research paper is required for your assignment is crucial, as each demands different preparation and writing strategies. Here, we will delve into three prominent types: argumentative, analytical, and compare and contrast papers. We will discuss their characteristics, suitability, and provide detailed examples to illustrate their application.

A.Argumentative Papers

Characteristics:

An argumentative or persuasive paper is designed to present a balanced view of a controversial issue, but ultimately aims to persuade the reader to adopt the writer's perspective. The key characteristics of this type of paper include:

Purpose: The primary goal is to convince the reader to support a particular stance on an issue. This is achieved by presenting arguments, evidence, and refuting opposing viewpoints.

Structure: Typically structured into an introduction, a presentation of both sides of the issue, a refutation of the opposing arguments, and a conclusion that reinforces the writer’s position.

Tone: While the tone should be logical and factual, it should not be overly emotional. Arguments must be supported with solid evidence, such as statistics, expert opinions, and factual data.

Suitability:

Argumentative papers are suitable for topics that have clear, opposing viewpoints. They are often used in debates, policy discussions, and essays aimed at influencing public opinion or academic discourse.

Topic: "Should governments implement universal basic income?"

Pro Side: Universal basic income provides financial security, reduces poverty, and can lead to a more equitable society.

Con Side: It could discourage work, lead to higher government expenditure, and might not be a sustainable long-term solution.

Argument: After presenting both sides, the paper would argue that the benefits of reducing poverty and financial insecurity outweigh the potential drawbacks, using evidence from various studies and real-world examples.

Writing Tips:

Clearly articulate your position on the issue from the beginning.

Present balanced arguments by including credible sources that support both sides.

Refute counterarguments effectively with logical reasoning and evidence.

Maintain a factual and logical tone, avoiding excessive emotional appeals.

B.Analytical Papers

An analytical research paper is focused on breaking down a topic into its core components, examining various perspectives, and drawing conclusions based on this analysis. The main characteristics include:

Purpose: To pose a research question, collect data from various sources, analyze different viewpoints, and synthesize the information to arrive at a personal conclusion.

Structure: Includes an introduction with a clear research question, a literature review that summarizes existing research, a detailed analysis, and a conclusion that summarizes findings.

Tone: Objective and neutral, avoiding personal bias or opinion. The focus is on data and logical analysis.

Analytical research papers are ideal for topics that require detailed examination and evaluation of various aspects. They are common in disciplines such as social sciences, humanities, and natural sciences, where deep analysis of existing research is crucial.

Topic: "The impact of social media on mental health."

Research Question: How does social media usage affect mental well-being among teenagers?

Analysis: Examine studies that show both positive (e.g., social support) and negative (e.g., anxiety and depression) impacts of social media. Analyze the methodologies and findings of these studies.

Conclusion: Based on the analysis, conclude whether the overall impact is more beneficial or harmful, remaining neutral and presenting evidence without personal bias.

Maintain an objective and neutral tone throughout the paper.

Synthesize information from multiple sources, ensuring a comprehensive analysis.

Develop a clear thesis based on the findings from your analysis.

Avoid inserting personal opinions or biases.

C.Compare and Contrast Papers

Compare and contrast papers are used to analyze the similarities and differences between two or more subjects. The key characteristics include:

Purpose: To identify and examine the similarities and differences between two or more subjects, providing a comprehensive understanding of their relationship.

Structure: Can be organized in two ways:

Point-by-Point: Each paragraph covers a specific point of comparison or contrast.

Subject-by-Subject: Each subject is discussed separately, followed by a comparison or contrast.

Tone: Informative and balanced, aiming to provide a thorough and unbiased comparison.

Compare and contrast papers are suitable for topics where it is important to understand the distinctions and similarities between elements. They are commonly used in literature, history, and various comparative studies.

Topic: "Compare and contrast the leadership styles of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X."

Comparison Points: Philosophies (non-violence vs. militant activism), methods (peaceful protests vs. more radical approaches), and impacts on the Civil Rights Movement.

Analysis: Describe each leader's philosophy and method, then analyze how these influenced their effectiveness and legacy.

Conclusion: Summarize the key similarities and differences, and discuss how both leaders contributed uniquely to the movement.

Provide equal and balanced coverage to each subject.

Use clear criteria for comparison, ensuring logical and coherent analysis.

Highlight both similarities and differences, ensuring a nuanced understanding of the subjects.

Maintain an informative tone, focusing on objective analysis rather than personal preference.

How to Write A Research Paper [Higher Efficiency & Better Results]

Conduct Preliminary Research

Before we get started with the research, it's important to gather relevant information related to it. This process, also known as the primary research method, helps researchers gain preliminary knowledge about the topic and identify research gaps. Whenever I begin researching a topic, I usually utilize Google and Google Scholar. Another excellent resource for conducting primary research is campus libraries, as they provide a wealth of great articles that can assist with your research.

Now, let's see how WPS Office and AIPal can be great research partners:

Let's say that I have some PDFs which I have gathered from different sources. With WPS Office, these PDFs can be directly uploaded not just to extract key points but also to interact with the PDF with special help from WPS AI.

Step 1: Let's open the PDF article or research paper that we have downloaded on WPS Office.

Step 2: Now, click on the WPS AI widget at the top right corner of the screen.

Step 3: This will open the WPS PDF AI pane on the right side of the screen. Click on "Upload".

Step 4: Once the upload is complete, WPS PDF AI will return with the key points from the PDF article, which can then be copied to a fresh new document on WPS Writer.

Step 5: To interact further with the document, click on the "Inquiry" tab to talk with WPS AI and get more information on the contents of the PDF.

Research is incomplete without a Google search, but what exactly should you search for? AIPal can help you with these answers. AIPal is a Chrome extension that can help researchers make their Google searches and interactions with Chrome more effective and efficient. If you haven't installed AIPal on Chrome yet, go ahead and download the extension; it's completely free to use:

Step 1: Let's search for a term on Google related to our research.

Step 2: An AIPal widget will appear right next to the Google search bar, click on it.

Step 3: Upon clicking it, an AIPal window will pop up. In this window, you will find a more refined answer for your searched term, along with links most relevant to your search, providing a more refined search experience.

WPS AI can also be used to extract more information with the help of WPS Writer.

Step 1: We might have some information saved in a Word document, either from lectures or during preliminary research. We can use WPS AI within Writer to gain more insights.

Step 2: Select the entire text you want to summarize or understand better.

Step 3: Once the text is selected, a hover menu will appear. Click on the "WPS AI" icon in this menu.

Step 4: From the list of options, click on "Explain" to understand the content more deeply, or click on "Summarize" to shorten the paragraph.

Step 5: The results will be displayed in a small WPS AI window.

Develop the Thesis statement

To develop a strong thesis statement, start by formulating a central question your paper will address. For example, if your topic is about the impact of social media on mental health, your thesis statement might be:

"Social media use has a detrimental effect on mental health by increasing anxiety, depression, and loneliness among teenagers."

This statement is concise, contentious, and sets the stage for your research. With WPS AI, you can use the "Improve" feature to refine your thesis statement, ensuring it is clear, coherent, and impactful.

Write the First draft

Begin your first draft by focusing on maintaining forward momentum and clearly organizing your thoughts. Follow your outline as a guide, but be flexible if new ideas emerge. Here's a brief outline to get you started:

Using WPS AI’s "Make Longer" feature, you can quickly elaborate key ideas and points of your studies and articles into a descriptive format to include in your draft, saving time and ensuring clarity.

Compose Introduction, Body and Conclusion paragraphs

When writing a research paper, it’s essential to transform your key points into detailed, descriptive paragraphs. WPS AI can help you streamline this process by enhancing your key points, ensuring each section of your paper is well-developed and coherent. Here’s how you can use WPS AI to compose your introduction, body, and conclusion paragraphs:

Let's return to the draft and start composing our introduction. The introduction should provide the background of the research paper and introduce readers to what the research paper will explore.

If your introduction feels too brief or lacks depth, use WPS AI’s "Make Longer" feature to expand on key points, adding necessary details and enhancing the overall narrative.

Once the introduction is completed, the next step is to start writing the body paragraphs and the conclusion of our research paper. Remember, the body paragraphs will incorporate everything about your research: methodologies, challenges, results, and takeaways.

If this paragraph is too lengthy or repetitive, WPS AI’s "Make Shorter" feature can help you condense it without losing essential information.

Write the Second Draft

In the second draft, refine your arguments, ensure logical flow, and check for clarity. Focus on eliminating any unnecessary information, ensuring each paragraph supports your thesis statement, and improving transitions between ideas. Incorporate feedback from peers or advisors, and ensure all citations are accurate and properly formatted. The second draft should be more polished and coherent, presenting your research in a clear and compelling manner.

WPS AI’s "Improve Writing" feature can be particularly useful here to enhance the overall quality and readability of your paper.

WPS Spellcheck can assist you in correcting spelling and grammatical errors, ensuring your paper is polished and professional. This tool helps you avoid common mistakes and enhances the readability of your paper, making a significant difference in the overall quality.

Bonus Tips: How to Get Inspiration for your Research Paper- WPS AI

WPS Office is a phenomenal office suite that students find to be a major blessing. Not only is it a free office suite equipped with advanced features that make it competitive in the market, but it also includes a powerful AI that automates and enhances many tasks, including writing a research paper. In addition to improving readability with its AI Proofreader tool, WPS AI offers two features, "Insight" and "Inquiry", that can help you gather information and inspiration for your research paper:

Insight Feature:

The Insight feature provides deep insights and information on various topics and fields. It analyzes literature to extract key viewpoints, trends, and research directions. For instance, if you're writing a research paper on the impact of social media on mental health, you can use the Insight feature to gather a comprehensive overview of the latest studies, key arguments, and emerging trends in this field. This helps you build a solid foundation for your paper and ensure you are covering all relevant aspects.

Inquiry Feature:

The Inquiry feature allows you to ask specific questions related to your research topic. This helps you gather necessary background information and refine your research focus effectively. For example, if you need detailed information on how social media usage affects teenagers' self-esteem, you can use the Inquiry feature to ask targeted questions and receive relevant answers based on the latest research.

FAQs about writing a research paper

1. can any source be used for academic research.

No, it's essential to use credible and relevant sources. Here is why:

Developing a Strong Argument: Your research paper relies on evidence to substantiate its claims. Using unreliable sources can undermine your argument and harm the credibility of your paper.

Avoiding Inaccurate Information: The internet is abundant with data, but not all sources can be considered reliable. Credible sources guarantee accuracy.

2. How can I avoid plagiarism?

To avoid plagiarism, follow these steps:

Keep Records of Your Sources: Maintain a record of all the sources you use while researching. This helps you remember where you found specific ideas or phrases and ensures proper attribution.

Quote and Paraphrase Correctly: When writing a paper, use quotation marks for exact words from a source and cite them properly. When paraphrasing, restate the idea in your own words and include a citation to acknowledge the original source.

Utilize a Plagiarism Checker: Use a plagiarism detection tool before submitting your paper. This will help identify unintentional plagiarism, ensuring your paper is original and properly referenced.

3. How can I cite sources properly?

Adhere to the citation style guide (e.g., APA, MLA) specified by your instructor or journal. Properly citing all sources both within the text and in the bibliography or references section is essential for maintaining academic integrity and providing clear credit to the original authors. This practice also helps readers locate and verify the sources you've used in your research.

4. How long should a research paper be?

The length of a research paper depends on its topic and specific requirements. Generally, research papers vary between 4,000 to 6,000 words, with shorter papers around 2,000 words and longer ones exceeding 10,000 words. Adhering to the length requirements provided for academic assignments is essential. More intricate subjects or extensive research often require more thorough explanations, which can impact the overall length of the paper.

Write Your Research Paper with the Comfort of Using WPS Office

Writing a research paper involves managing numerous complicated tasks, such as ensuring the correct formatting, not missing any crucial information, and having all your data ready. The process of how to write a research paper is inherently challenging. However, if you are a student using WPS Office, the task becomes significantly simpler. WPS Office, especially with the introduction of WPS AI, provides all the resources you need to write the perfect research paper. Download WPS Office today and discover how it can transform your research paper writing experience for the better.

• 1. How to Use WPS AI/Chatgpt to Write Research Papers: Guide for Beginners
• 2. How to Write a Conclusion - Steps with Examples
• 3. Free Graph Paper: Easy Steps to Make Printable Graph Paper PDF
• 4. How to Write a Proposal [ Steps & Examples]
• 5. How to Write an Abstract - Steps with Examples
• 6. How to Write a Hook- Steps With Examples

15 years of office industry experience, tech lover and copywriter. Follow me for product reviews, comparisons, and recommendations for new apps and software.

Main Navigation

• Contact NeurIPS
• Code of Ethics
• Code of Conduct
• Create Profile
• Journal To Conference Track
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Proceedings
• Future Meetings
• Exhibitor Information
• Privacy Policy

NeurIPS 2024 Competition Track Program 

Below you will find a brief summary of accepted competitions NeurIPS 2024. 

Competitions are grouped by category, all prizes are tentative and depend solely on the organizing team of each competition and the corresponding sponsors. Please note that all information is subject to change, visit the competition websites regularly and contact the organizers of each competition directly for more information.

Physics and Scientific Computing

Myochallenge 2024: physiological dexterity and agility in bionic humans.

Vittorio Caggiano (MyoLab), Guillaume Durandau (McGill University), Seungmoon Song (Northeastern University), Chun Kwang Tan (Northeastern University), Huiyi Wang (McGill University), Balint Hodossy (Imperial College London), Pierre Schumacher (Max-Planck Institute), Letizia Gionfrida (King's College London), Massimo Sartori (University of Twente), Vikash Kumar (MyoLab)

Contact:   [email protected]

Limb loss represents a traumatic and destabilizing event in human life, significantly impacting an individual's quality of life and independence. Advancements in bionic prosthetic limbs offer a remarkable opportunity to regain mobility and functionality. Bionic limb human users (Bionic Humans) are able to learn to use those prosthetic extensions to compensate for their lost limb, and reclaim aspects of their former motor abilities. The movement generalization and environment adaptability skills displayed by humans using bionic extensions are a testament to motor intelligence, a capability yet unmatched by current artificial intelligence agents.

To this end, we propose to organize MyoChallenge 2024: Physiological Dexterity and Agility in Bionic Humans, where we will provide a highly detailed neuromechanical and robotic simulation environment and invite experts worldwide to develop any type of controller for both the biological (muscle) and mechanical (bionic), including state-of-the-art reinforcement learning to solve a series of dexterous motor tasks involving human-to-bionic-limb interaction.

Building on the success of the MyoChallenge on the NeurIPS 2022 and 2023 editions, this year's challenge will push the boundaries on how symbiotic human-robotic interaction needs to be coordinated to produce agile and dexterous behaviours. This year MyoChallenge will have two tracks: manipulation and locomotion. The manipulation track will require bi-manual coordination of the BionicMyoArms model -- a combination of a virtual biological arm and a Modular Prosthetic Limb (MPL). The goal will be to coordinate the use of those two limbs to manipulate a series of objects. In the locomotion track, we will exploit a new BionicMyoLegs model made from the combination of a virtual bilateral biological leg with a trans-femoral amputation together with an Open Source prosthetic Leg The goal will be to coordinate the musculo-skeleto-bionic model to navigate challenging terrains and obstacles in an oval running loop. This running circuit is inspired by the Paralympic steeplechase and Cybathlon.

FAIR Universe – the challenge of handling uncertainties in fundamental science

David Rousseau (Université Paris-Saclay), Wahid Bhimji (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Paolo Calafiura (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Ragansu Chakkappai (Université Paris-Saclay), Yuan-Tang Chou (University of Washington), Sascha Diefenbacher (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Steven Farrell (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Aishik Ghosh (UC Irvine) Isabelle Guyon (ChaLearn, Google), Chris Harris (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Elham E Khoda (University of Washington), Benjamin Nachman (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Yulei Zhang (Lawrence Berkeley National Lab), Ihsan Ullah (ChaLearn)

Contact:  [email protected]

BELKA: The Big Encoded Library for Chemical Assessment

Andrew Blevins (Leash Biosciences), Brayden J Halverson (Leash Biosciences), Nate Wilkinson (Leash Biosciences), Ian K Quigley (Leash Biosciences)

Small molecule drugs are often discovered using a brute force physical search, wherein scientists test for interactions between candidate drugs and their protein targets in a laboratory setting. As druglike chemical space is large (10^60), more efficient methods to search through this space are desirable. To enable the discovery and application of such methods, we generated the Big Encoded Library for Chemical Assessment (BELKA), roughly 3.6B physical binding measurements between 133M small molecules and 3 protein targets using DNA-encoded chemical library technology. We hope this dataset encourages the community to explore methods to represent small molecule chemistry and predict likely binders using chemical and protein target structure.

ML4CFD Competition: Harnessing Machine Learning for Computational Fluid Dynamics in Airfoil Design

Mouadh Yagoubi (IRT SystemX), David Danan (IRT SystemX), Milad Leyli-abadi (IRT SystemX), Jocelyn Ahmed Mazari (Ansys, SimAI team), Florent Bonnet (Institut des systèmes intelligents et robotique (ISIR) - Sorbonne Université), Jean-Patrick Brunet (IRT SystemX), Maroua Gmati (IRT SystemX), Asma Farjallah (NVIDIA), Paola Cinnella (Sorbonne Université), Patrick Gallinari (Sorbonne Université, Criteo AI Lab), Marc Schoenauer (INRIA)

Contact:  [email protected]

The integration of machine learning (ML) techniques for addressing intricate physics problems is increasingly recognized as a promising avenue for expediting simulations. However, assessing ML-derived physical models poses a significant challenge for their adoption within industrial contexts. This competition is designed to promote the development of innovative ML approaches for tackling physical challenges, leveraging our recently introduced unified evaluation framework known as Learning Industrial Physical Simulations (LIPS). Building upon the preliminary edition held from November 2023 to March 20241, this iteration centers on a task fundamental to a well-established physical application: airfoil design simulation, utilizing our proposed AirfRANS dataset. The competition evaluates solutions based on various criteria encompassing ML accuracy, computational efficiency, Out-Of-Distribution performance, and adherence to physical principles. Notably, this competition represents a pioneering effort in exploring ML-driven surrogate methods aimed at optimizing the trade-off between computational efficiency and accuracy in physical simulations. Hosted on the Codabench platform, the competition offers online training and evaluation for all participating solutions.

Generative AI and Large Language Models 

Hac: the hacker-cup ai competition.

Weiwei Yang (Miscorosft Research),  Mark Saroufim  (Meta),  Joe Isaacson (Meta),  Luca Antiga (Lightning AI),  Greg Bowyer ( independent), Driss Guessous (Meta),  Christian Puhrsch  (Meta), Geeta Chauhan (Meta),  Supriya Rao (Meta),  Margaret Li ( University of Washington), David Harmeyer (Meta),  Wesley May (Meta)

Contact:  https://discord.gg/wWeN9hTH32

LLM Merging: Building LLMs Efficiently through Merging

Derek Tam (University of Toronto), Margaret Li (Meta), Prateek Yadav (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill), Rickard Brüel-Gabrielsson (MIT), Jiacheng Zhu (MIT), Kristjan Greenewald (MIT-IBM Watson AI Lab, IBM Research), Mikhail Yurochkin (IBM), Mohit Bansal (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill), Colin Raffel (University of Toronto), Leshem Choshen (IBM)

Contact:  [email protected]

Training high-performing large language models (LLMs) from scratch is a notoriously expensive and difficult task, costing hundreds of millions of dollars in compute alone. These pretrained LLMs, however, can cheaply and easily be adapted to new tasks via fine-tuning, leading to a proliferation of models that suit specific use cases. Recent work has shown that specialized fine-tuned models can be rapidly merged to combine capabilities and generalize to new skills. This raises the question: given a new suite of desired skills and design parameters, is it necessary to fine-tune or train yet another LLM from scratch, or can similar existing models be re-purposed for a new task with the right selection or merging procedure? The LLM Merging challenge aims to spur the development and evaluation of methods for merging and reusing existing models to form stronger new models without needing additional training. Specifically, the competition focuses on merging existing publicly-released expert models from Hugging Face, using only minimal compute and additional parameters. The goal will be to develop merged models that outperform existing models and existing merging baselines. Submissions will be judged based on the average accuracy on a set of held-out multiple-choice evaluation tasks and their efficiency. To make the competition as accessible as possible and ensure that the merging procedures are more efficient than fine-tuning, we will enforce a compute budget and focus on merging models with fewer than 8B parameters. A starter kit with all necessary materials (baseline implementations, requirements, the evaluation script, etc.) will be released on May 1st.

Edge-Device Large Language Model Competition

Shiwei Liu (University of Oxford), Kai Han (Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab), Adriana Fernandez-Lopez (Meta AI), Ajay Kumar Jaiswal (University of Texas at Austin), Zahra Atashgahi (University of Twente), Boqian Wu (University of Luxembourg), Edoardo Ponti (University of Edinburgh), Callie Hao (Georgia Institute of Technology), Rebekka Burkholz (Helmholtz Center CISPA), Olga Saukh (Graz University of Technology), Lu Yin (University of Surrey), Tianjin Huang (University of Exeter), Andreas Zinonos (Imperial College London), Jared Tanner (University of Oxford), Yunhe Wang (Huawei Noah’s Ark Lab)

Contact:  [email protected]

Multiagent Systems and Reinforcement Learning

Auto-bidding in large-scale auctions: learning decision-making in uncertain and competitive games.

Jian Xu (Alibaba Group), Zhilin Zhang (Alibaba Group), Zongqing Lu (Peking University), Xiaotie Deng (Peking University), Michael P. Wellman (University of Michigan), Chuan Yu (Alibaba Group), Shuai Dou (Alibaba Group), Yusen Huo (Alibaba Group), Zhiwei Xu (Alibaba Group), Zhijian Duan (Peking University), Shaopan Xiong (Alibaba Group), Chuang Liu (Alibaba Group), Ningyuan Li (Peking University), Kefan Su (Peking University), Wei Gong (Alibaba Group), Bo Zheng (Alibaba Group)

Contact:    [email protected]

Lux AI Season 3: Multi-Agent Meta Learning at Scale

Stone Tao (University of California, San Diego), Akarsh Kumar (MIT),  Bovard Doerschuk-Tiberi (Kaggle),  Isabelle Pan (University of California, San Diego), Addision Howard (Kaggle), Hao Su (University of California, San Diego)

Contact:  [email protected]

The proposed competition revolves around testing the limits of agents (e.g rule-based or Meta RL agents) when it comes to adapting to a game with changing dynamics. We propose a unique 1v1 competition format where both teams face off in a sequence of 5 games. The game mechanics, along with partial observability are designed to ensure that optimal gameplay requires agents to efficiently explore and discover the game dynamics. They ensure that the strongest agents may play "suboptimally" in game 1 to explore, but then win easily in games 2 to 5 by leveraging information gained through game 1 and adapting. This competition provides a GPU parallelized game environment via jax to enable fast training/evaluation on a single GPU, lowering barriers of entry to typically industry-level scales of research. Participants can submit their agents to compete against other submitted agents on a online leaderboard hosted by Kaggle ranked by a Trueskill ranking system. The results of the competition will provide a dataset of top open-sourced rule-based agents as well as many game episodes that can lead to unique analysis (e.g. quantifying emergence/surprise) past competitions cannot usually provide thanks to the number of competitors the Lux AI Challenges often garner

The Concordia Contest: Advancing the Cooperative Intelligence of Language Model Agents

Chandler Smith (MATS), Rakshit S. Trivedi (MIT), Jesse Clifton (Cooperative AI Foundation, Center on Long-Term Risk),  Lewis Hammond (Cooperative AI Foundation, Oxford), Akbir Khan (Cooperative AI Foundation, UCL), Marwa Abdulhai (UC Berkely), Alexander Sasha Vezhnevets (Google Deepmind), John P. Agapiou (Google Deepmind), Edgar A. Duéñez-Guzmán (Google Deepmind), Jayd Matyas (Google Deepmind), Danny Karmon (Google Research), Dylan Hadfield-Menell (MIT), Natasha Jaques (Google Deepmind, UW), Tim Baarslag (Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica, Utrecht University), Joel Z. Leibo (Google Deepmind)

Building on the success of the Melting Pot contest at NeurIPS 2023, which challenged participants to develop multi-agent reinforcement learning agents capable of cooperation in groups, we are excited to propose a new contest centered on cooperation between language model (LM) agents in intricate, text-mediated environments. Our goal is to advance research on the cooperative intelligence of such LM agents. Of particular interest are the agents capable of using natural language to effectively cooperate with each other in complex environments, even in the face of challenges such as competing interests, differing values, and potential miscommunication. To this end, we will leverage the recently released Concordia framework, an open-source library for defining open-ended environments where LM agents like those of Park et al. (2023) can interact with one another by generating free-form natural text describing what they intend to do or say. Concordia provides a suite of mixed-motive social dilemma scenarios where cooperation is valuable but hard to achieve. The proposed contest will challenge the participants to develop LM agents that exhibit cooperative intelligence in a variety of Concordia scenarios designed to assess multiple distinct skills of cooperation, including promise-keeping, negotiation, reciprocity, reputation, partner choice, compromise, and sanctioning. Participants will be scored based on the ability of their trained agents in executing skillful cooperation, particularly in the presence of new co-players in unforeseen (held-out) scenarios. Given the rapid development of LMs and the anticipated increase in the use of personalised LM agents, we contend that their propensity and ability to cooperate well with a diverse array of other actors (human or machine) will soon be of critical importance.

Signal Reconstruction and Enhancement

Urgent challenge.

Anurag Kumar (Meta), Chenda Li (Shanghai Jiaotong University), Samuele Cornell (Università Politecnica delle Marche), Shinji Watanabe (Carnegie Mellon University), Tim Fingscheidt (Technische Universität Braunschweig), Wangyou Zhang (Shanghai Jiaotong University), Wei Wang (Shanghai Jiaotong University), Yanmin Qian (Shanghai Jiaotong University), Marvin Sach (Technische Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina zu Braunschweig), Kohei Saijo (Waseda University), Zhaoheng Ni (Meta)

Contact:  [email protected]

Speech enhancement (SE) is the task of improving the quality of the desired speech while suppressing other interference signals. Tremendous progress has been achieved in the past decade in deep learning-based SE approaches. However, existing SE studies are often limited in one or multiple aspects of the following: coverage of SE sub-tasks, diversity and amount of data (especially real-world evaluation data), and diversity of evaluation metrics. As the first step to fill this gap, we establish a novel SE challenge, called URGENT, to promote research towards universal SE. It concentrates on the universality, robustness, and generalizability of SE approaches. In the challenge, we extend the conventionally narrow SE definition to cover different sub-tasks, thus allowing the exploration of the limits of current SE models. We start with four SE sub-tasks, including denoising, dereverberation, bandwidth extension, and declipping. Note that handling the above sub-tasks within a single SE model has been challenging and underexplored in the SE literature due to the distinct data formats in different tasks. As a result, most existing SE approaches are only designed for a specific subtask. To address this issue, we propose a technically novel framework to unify all these sub-tasks in a single model, which is compatible to most existing SE approaches. Several state-of-the-art baselines with different popular architectures have been provided for this challenge, including TF-GridNet, BSRNN, and Conv-TasNet. We also take care of the data diversity and amount by collecting abundant public speech and noise data from different domains. This allows for the construction of diverse training and evaluation data. Additional real recordings are further used for evaluating robustness and generalizability. Different from existing SE challenges, we adopt a wide range of evaluation metrics to provide comprehensive insights into the true capability of both generative and discriminative SE approaches. We expect this challenge would not only provide valuable insights into the current status of SE research, but also attract more research towards building universal SE models with strong robustness and good generalizability.

Weather4cast 2024 – Multi-task Challenges for Rain Movie Prediction on the Road to Hi-Res Foundation Models

Aleksandra Gruca (Silesian Unviversity of Technology), Pilar Rípodas (AEMET - Agencia Estatal de Meteorología), Xavier Calbet (AEMET - Agencia Estatal de Meteorología), Llorenç Lliso (AEMET - Agencia Estatal de Meteorología), Federico Serva (Institute of Marine Sciences (CNR-ISMAR), Italy), Bertrand Le Saux (European Space Agency), David P. Kreil (Boku University Vienna),  Sepp Hochreiter (IARAI)

Contact:  [email protected]

Now, in its third year, Weather4acst 2024 aims to improve rain forecasts world-wide on an expansive data set with over a magnitude more hi-res rain radar data, allowing a move towards Foundation Models through multi-modality, multi-scale, multi-task challenges. Accurate rain predictions are becoming ever more critical for everyone, with climate change increasing the frequency of extreme precipitation events. Notably, the new models and insights will have a particular impact for the many regions on Earth where costly weather radar data are not available. Join us on www.weather4cast.net !

Ariel Data Challenge 2024: Extracting exoplanetary signals from the Ariel Space Telescope

Kai Hou Yip (University College London), Lorenzo V. Mugnai (Cardiff University), Andrea Bocchieri (Sapienza Università di Roma), Andreas Papageorgiou (Cardiff University), Orphée Faucoz (Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales), Tara Tahseen (University College London), Virginie Batista (Institut d'astrophysique de Paris), Angèle Syty (Université Paris-Saclay), Enzo Pascale (Sapienza Università di Roma),  Quentin Changeat (European Space Agency), Billy Edwards (SRON, Netherlands Institute for Space Research), Paul Eccleston (STFC RAL), Clare Jenner (Distributed Research utilising Advanced Computing (DiRAC)),  Ryan King (UK Space Agency), Theresa Lueftinger (European Space Agency), Nikolaos Nikolaou (University College London), Pascale Danto (CNES), Sudeshna Boro Saikia (University of Vienna), Luís F. Simões (ML Analytics), Giovanna Tinetti (University College London), Ingo P. Waldmann (University College London / The Alan Turing Institute) 

Contact:  https://www.ariel-datachallenge.space /

The Ariel Data Challenge 2024 tackles one of astronomy's hardest data analysis problems - extracting faint exoplanetary signals from noisy space telescope observations like the upcoming Ariel Mission. A major obstacle are systematic noise sources, such as ``jitter noise" arising from spacecraft vibrations, which corrupts spectroscopic data used to study exoplanet atmospheres. This complex spatio-temporal noise challenges conventional parametric denoising techniques. In this challenge, the jitter time series is simulated based on Ariel's payload design and other noise effects are taken from in-flight data from JWST, in order to provide a realistic representation of the effect.

To recover minute signals from the planet's atmosphere, participants must push boundaries of current approaches to denoise this multimodality data across image, time, and spectral domains. This requires novel solutions for non-Gaussian noise, data drifts, uncertainty quantification, and limited ground truth. Success will directly improve the Ariel pipeline design and enable new frontiers in characterising exoplanet atmospheres - a key science priority in the coming decades for understanding planetary formation, evolution, and habitability.

Responsible AI and Security

Clas 2024: the llm and agent safety competition.

Zhen Xiang (UIUC), Yi Zeng (VT), Mintong Kang (UIUC), Chejian Xu (UIUC), Jiawei Zhang (UIUC), Zhuowen Yuan (UIUC), Zhaorun Chen (UChicago), Chulin Xie (UIUC), Fengqing Jiang (UW), Minzhou Pan (Northeastern University), Junyuan Hong (UT Austin), Ruoxi Jia (VT), Radha Poovendran (UW), Bo Li (UIUC, UChicago)

Contact:   [email protected]

Ensuring safety emerges as a pivotal objective in developing large language models (LLMs) and LLM-powered agents. The Competition for LLM and Agent Safety (CLAS) aims to advance the understanding of the vulnerabilities in LLMs and LLM-powered agents and to encourage methods for improving their safety. The competition features three main tracks linked through the methodology of prompt injection, with tasks designed to amplify societal impact by involving practical adversarial objectives for different domains. In the Jailbreaking Attack track, participants are challenged to elicit harmful outputs in guardrail LLMs via prompt injection. In the Backdoor Trigger Recovery for Models track, participants are given a CodeGen LLM embedded with hundreds of domain-specific backdoors. They are asked to reverse-engineer the trigger for each given target. In the Back- door Trigger Recovery for Agents track, trigger reverse engineering will be focused on eliciting specific backdoor targets based on malicious agent actions. As the first competition addressing the safety of both LLMs and LLM agents, CLAS 2024 aims to foster collaboration between various communities promoting research and tools for enhancing the safety of LLMs and real-world AI systems.

Erasing the Invisible: A Stress-Test Challenge for Image Watermarks

Mucong Ding (University of Maryland, College Park), Tahseen Rabbani (University of Maryland, College Park), Bang An (University of Maryland, College Park), Souradip Chakraborty (University of Maryland, College Park), Chenghao Deng (University of Maryland, College Park), Mehrdad Saberi (University of Maryland, College Park), Yuxin Wen (University of Maryland, College Park), Xuandong Zhao (UC Santa Barbara), Mo Zhou (Johns Hopkins University), Anirudh Satheesh (University of Maryland, College Park), Mary-Anne Hartley (Yale University), Lei Li ( Carnegie Mellon University), Yu-Xiang Wang (UC Santa Barbara), Vishal M. Patel (Rutgers University), Soheil Feizi (University of Maryland, College Park), Tom Goldstein (University of Maryland, College Park), Furong Huang (University of Maryland, College Park)

Contact:  [email protected]

"Erasing the Invisible" is a pioneering competition designed to rigorously stress-test image watermarks, aiming to enhance their robustness significantly. Its standout feature is the introduction of dual tracks for black-box and beige-box attacks, providing a nuanced approach to validate the reliability and robustness of watermarks under varied conditions of visibility and knowledge. The competition spans from July 18 to October 31, inviting individuals and teams to register and participate in a dynamic challenge. Throughout the competition, employing a dataset of 10k images accessed through the Hugging Face API, competitors will receive updated evaluation results on a rolling basis and submit their refined techniques for the final evaluation, which will be conducted on an extensive dataset of 50k images. The evaluation process of this competition not only emphasizes the effectiveness of watermark removal but also highlights the critical importance of maintaining image quality, with results reflected on a continuously updated leaderboard. "Erasing the Invisible" promises to elevate watermarking technology to new heights of resilience, setting a precedent for future research and application in digital content security and safeguarding against unauthorized use and misinformation in the digital age.

The NeurIPS 2024 LLM Privacy Challenge

Qinbin Li (UC Berkeley), Junyuan Hong (UT Austin), Chulin Xie (UIUC), Junyi Hou (NUS), Yiqun Diao (NUS), Zhun Wang (UC Berkeley), Dan Hendrycks (Center for AI Safety), Zhangyang Wang (UT Austin), Bo Li (UChicago), Bingsheng He (NUS), Dawn Song (UC Berkeley)

Contact:  [email protected]

Program Committee

We are very grateful to the colleagues that helped us review and select the competition proposals for this year

• Aleksandr Panov (Artificial Intelligence Research Institute)
• Aleksandra Gruca (Silesian Unviversity of Technology)
• Annika Reinke (German Cancer Research Center)
• Aravind Mohan (Roblox)
• Ashwin Hegde (NobleAI)
• Björn Schuller (Technische Universität München)
• Byron V Galbraith (Bloomfire)
• Chris Cameron (,University of British Columbia)
• Christian Eichenberger (iarai.ac.at)
• David P Kreil (Boku University Vienna)
• David Rousseau (IJCLab)
• Dina Bashkirova (Boston University)
• Dominik Baumann (Aalto University)
• Emilio Cartoni (Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione)
• Erhan Bilal (International Business Machines)
• Evelyne Viegas (University of Washington)
• Geoffrey Siwo (University of Michigan - Ann Arbor)
• Gregory Clark (Google)
• Haozhe Sun (Université Paris-Saclay)
• Harald Carlens (ML Contests)
• Iuliia Kotseruba (York University)
• Jean-roch Vlimant (California Institute of Technology)
• Jun Ma (University of Toronto)
• Karolis Jucys (University of Bath)
• Louis-Guillaume Gagnon (University of California, Berkeley)
• Mantas Mazeika (University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign)
• Mikhail Burtsev (London Institute for Mathematical Sciences)
• Moritz Neun (Kaiko)
• Odd Erik Gundersen (Norwegian University of Science and Technology)
• Parth Patwa (Amazon)
• Pranay Manocha (Princeton University)
• Ryan Holbrook (Kaggle)
• Sahika Genc (University of Michigan)
• Tabitha Edith Lee (Lockheed Martin)
• Tianjian Zhang (The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen)
• Yingshan Chang (Carnegie Mellon University)
• Zhen Xu (Tsinghua University)
• Ziqian Luo (Oracle)