November 2010

Referee Response Form for Physical Review - Rapid Communications

Insert X in the parentheses in the response form as appropriate.

Referee:

Manuscript Number:

Author:

Title:

1. Please summarize your assessment of the paper:

   	YES	MAYBE	NO
   Does the paper contain enough significant new physics to warrant publication in the Physical Review?	(  )	(  )	(  )
   Does the paper warrant the priority treatment of a Rapid Communication:	(  )	(  )	(  )
   Is the paper scientifically sound and not misleading?	(  )	(  )	(  )
   Is the paper well organized and clearly written?	(  )	(  )	(  )
   Are the subject matter and style of presentation appropriate for the Physical Review?	(  )	(  )	(  )
   Is the length appropriate?	(  )	(  )	(  )

2. Please evaluate quality of Research and Presentation:

   (  )	Excellent	(  )
   (  )	Good	(  )
   (  )	Average	(  )
   (  )	Marginal	(  )
   (  )	Poor	(  )

3. Recommendation:

   (  )	Publish without change (please give reasons in report).
   (  )	Publish after authors have considered the optional revisions mentioned in the report.
   (  )	Publish after authors have made the revisions mentioned in the report. (I do not need to see the manuscript again.)
   (  )	Revisions are necessary. Return to me on resubmittal.
   (  )	Revisions are necessary. On resubmittal, send to:
   	(Use as much space as needed to list names of alternative reviewers.)
   (  )	Manuscript is more appropriate for another
   	(  ) journal (specify):
   	or
   	(  ) section (specify):
   (  )	Do not publish; see report.
   (  )	Other; see report.

Begin report (use as much space as is needed):

End report.