Senior Experimental Physics Report Guidelines

Being able to present your work in an appropriate form is a critical part of being a Physicist. The
report assignment is in the form of how experimental Physics is presented in a leading Physics
journal.

There are two key parts to this: form and content. Whilst they are both important, and are marked,
the content, which should reveal your understanding of the science, is of most importance. The
following sections outline the requirements and critical issues.

Content
A scientific paper tells a story, and needs a narrative. Typically the author will have an intention to
investigate some aspect of science. The introduction should set the scene by providing the
background to the topic being investigated, explaining what is already known, what new knowledge
is being sought, and why it is important. From this the next sections should flow logically: how you
set out to do it, what results you got and what they mean. The end product should be a coherent
and consistent story.

It needs to be essentially self-contained, with references directing the reader to other important
relevant material, such as the historical context and to the derivation of results that are only stated.

A common mistake is not to understand the difference between a lab book write-up and a report.
Your lab book should be very complete and detailed, and include all your mistakes (neatly crossed
out), all your derivation of equations and the details of your workings (eg including more significant
figures than are warranted until you get to the final result). A report should be much more succinct,
presenting just what is important for the intelligent informed reader to understand what you have
done, what they key results are, how you got them, and what they mean. Some examples:

 It is rarely necessary to include tables of actual measurement data, if they are solely for
improving accuracy. The mean and s.e.m. or uncertainty will almost always be sufficient.
 Derivations of formulae, whilst helpful in your logbook for your understanding, can typically
be omitted in experimental papers. Just reference where they come from.
 Do not copy and paste hand-drawn graphs, instrument printouts, photos of the screens of
instruments. These can all be appropriate in a log book, but are almost never appropriate in
a report. Use the underlying data to generate a proper graph or plot (e.g. in Excel).

Judicious use of figures is critical. A well conceived and executed figure can convey meaning much
more directly and concisely than words, maybe a thousand words.1 They do take up space, so getting

1
Frederick R. Barnard, "One look is worth a thousand words", Printer's Ink (December 1921)

1 Updated: 2015-05-24
the correct balance is important. A figure of the experimental set-up is essential. A figure illustrating
the core physical principle is often very helpful, depending on how complicated it is. Typically the
clearest way to presents results is graphically. Some experiments, such as those that involve
imaging, are likely to need more figures; the text then needs to be even more concise and efficient
to fit in the page limit.

As well as providing useful references that assist the reader to understand the background to the
work, or important details that you do not include, it is also essential that you reference any
material that you take from anywhere else, even if it is the lab manual (failing to do this is
plagiarism).

More detailed guidelines on the content of a scientific paper are included later.

You do not need to write about the whole experiment. However you should be careful to write
about enough of it to be able demonstrate a sound understanding of the Physics. Some experiments
contain so many parts that to cover them all would probably mean compromising on the depth.
Others focus more on one thing in depth and it would be hard to just write up one part. You need to
use your judgement on this, but you should think carefully if you are not planning to write about
most or all of the experiment.

Format
The format that we want you to use is that of Physical Review A (PRA), which is a premier
international journal published by the American Physical Society. Information on how to prepare a
manuscript is given at: http://journals.aps.org/pra/authors .

The journal helpfully provides a template in LaTeX, which is a text formatting program that is often
used by Physicists as it formats equations and tables very well. You are strongly encouraged to invest
the time to learn to use Latex, which is available for free on all operating systems (http://www.latex-
project.org/). With Latex installed, you should make use of the PRA template files available from:
http://journals.aps.org/revtex .

If you wish to use different software, such as Microsoft Word, you can do so; however you must
achieve the same format. Part of the task is to produce the report in the appropriate format and
marks will be deducted based on the extent that a report deviates from the format. Unofficial Word
templates for this journal can be found online, for example:
http://www2.ensc.sfu.ca/~whitmore/courses/ensc803/materials/Unofficial_APS_Template.doc ,
which you use at your own risk and should check the result matches the requirements.

Note the following which may be ambiguous or differ from the instructions online:

 The report must be no more than four pages (some of the Phys Rev journals are longer)
 The figures must be inline in the text near where they are discussed (APS permits Word
manuscripts to be submitted with figures at the end because they will reformat them – we
are looking for the final product from you).

2 Updated: 2015-05-24
General Guidelines for Preparing a Scientific Paper
The following is the general structure of a paper, but as you will find from browsing the published
literature there are wide variations that depend on the content of the paper. Use the following as a
basis from which to work but remember that it is not a template. Your report should be
understandable to a scientifically literate person (e.g. another senior physics student) without
referring to the lab manual.

Title
Choose a title that reflects the physics, not the lab experiment title (e.g. not "Experiment 5: Noise").

Affiliation and Name

Use your SID instead of your name, and The University of Sydney, Sydney NSW 2006 Australia and
your email address.

Abstract
This is a paragraph at the beginning of a paper that summarises briefly the experiment, the main
quantitative results and their implications. Authors of journal papers usually write the abstract after
they have finished writing the paper. When conducting a literature search, it is the abstract that is
accessible to everyone even when the whole paper is not (you often have to be a subscriber to a
journal, or pay per article, to obtain the full paper). So the abstract is very important for informing
potential readers of the contents of a paper. This enables readers to decide whether to obtain and
read the full paper. A good abstract will save the reader a great deal of time.

Introduction
This section is where the paper starts. It does not rely on the abstract. It usually includes some
background or history to the area of research. It is very rare for an idea to arise by itself since there
is always some precedent that has led to the ideas being tested in an experiment. It might also
include some application of the principle behind the experiment. For example, say the experiment
was about the sign of the charge carriers in a semiconductor, one application is a magnetic field
sensor that uses the Hall Effect. Finally, some motivation is required for conducting this experiment.
Why would anyone want to conduct this experiment? What did you test or examine? That is, give
the reader a “road map” about where you are headed in the following sections. This can be brought
together in a paragraph starting “In this manuscript we…” which then proceeds to outline the aim
and key observations.

Theory
If there is some background mathematical theory or qualitative ideas that need to be introduced so
that the experimental results can be understood, then this is the place to do it. This background
material may not be mathematical, it may be the physical principle behind the experiment, and this
is often best represented with a figure. The section itself doesn’t have to be called “Theory”. In fact,
you will find it missing in some papers because there was no background theory that was needed to
be discussed. In many cases the theory is not extensive enough to place it in a dedicated section and
is simply incorporated in the Introduction.

3 Updated: 2015-05-24
Experimental Procedure
Since the paper is about an experiment or experiments, there must be some description of the
apparatus used. A reader can only gain confidence in the results if they are confident that you had
appropriate apparatus and were able to describe its function and limitations (every piece of
apparatus has its limitations, no matter how expensive it is!). In many cases you need to describe in
some detail those parts of the apparatus that are critical to the understanding of the experimental
results. A diagram goes a long way in helping the reader understand your description of the setup. If
more than one setup was used, or there are several parts to an experiment, then you should use
subsections. Stand back from the experiment and ask yourself which are the most important bits . . .
and focus most on those. Calibration of an instrument, for instance, is important but doesn’t need a
long description.

Results and Discussion

A discussion of the results is best placed along with the presentation of the results. It breaks up the
flow of a report to separate the results and discussion into two different sections. The analysis of
your results should be quantitative (with errors) and honest: attempt to explain discrepancies in
physical terms, do not just dismiss them. If you used subsections in describing your experiment(s),
then use them again, and use cross-referencing between sections (e.g. using the calibration
curve/table in Fig X/Table Y, or the results from section Z) rather than repeating information given
elsewhere in the report. Remember that the more you can connect the different parts of the
experiment in your writing, the better the paper/report will read.

Conclusions
A conclusion is NOT a place where you say: “. . . therefore, I conclude that I have discovered the
following new physical principles . . . ”. It is just a summary of what the experiment was about, i.e.,
the results and what they mean. It is rather like an extended abstract (there is usually a word limit
for an abstract), summarising the results in more detail and maybe suggesting ways this experiment
or future experiments might be improved or extended, or how the results might be applied. Quite
often a professional scientist will skip most of the paper and go straight to the conclusion to save
time. This section is often the weakest part of most student reports. Try to spend some time on this
section. This will also help you in writing the abstract.

References
We expect you to read relevant material beyond the lab manual when preparing your report. All
important sources of material on which your report relies, including web resources, must be
acknowledged with appropriate references. References should be cited by number, within square
brackets, with a numbered list at the end of your report (as specified by the journal). The extent of
your outside reading can make a big difference to the scientific impact of your report.

You should identify several key papers (or books) that underpin the experiment about which you are
writing. You should read them so that you understand the context and reference them appropriately
in explaining the context, the development of the key concepts, the theoretical underpinnings, the
experimental design, or whatever is important in the particular experiment. You may need to
reference material in the results and discussion if you need material (such as additional data) from
other sources, and you are likely to want to reference other work when you compare your results to
accepted values.

4 Updated: 2015-05-24
Finding suitable references is an important part of experimental science. In the real world this would
largely be done before starting the experiment. This is effectively the literature review that allows
you to understand what has already been and where the unknowns are that are worth exploring.
Identifying suitable literature is an important skill. General reviews in the “popular” press, such as
Scientific American, or online can be a useful starting point to get an overview, but are not the sort
of authoritative material for a proper reference. They can however lead you to that material as well
as providing an overall context to understand the more detailed material.

Wikipedia, and many other online resources, can be a helpful “jumping off” point, giving you an
overview of a topic, plus pointers to more authoritative resources. They are very very rarely
appropriate as references (unless you are doing so to acknowledge the source of a figure that you
have appropriated).

The lab manual is not a proper reference and should only be referenced if you find it essential to
directly use material from it. Markers are always unimpressed when the lab manual is referenced,
and when material from it is recycled. (However, if you must use material from the lab notes,
perhaps because you cannot identify a more appropriate source, then you must reference them.)

You must also reference any source of material you directly copy, whether text or figures; which you
should do only where there is strong justification.

5 Updated: 2015-05-24
Common mistakes and helpful hints
 The best way to gain an appreciation of the form and content of a scientific paper is to read a
few. Since the style we require is that of Phys Rev A, choose a couple that look interesting and
study them for the structure and format. You should be able to access Phys Rev A papers
(http://journals.aps.org/pra/) from within the University network.
 Do not regurgitate the lab notes.
 Ensure your report is logically consistent with all sections flowing together to tell the story.
 Be sure to explain what you did and observed in addition to explaining the underlying physics.
 Remember to write in the correct tense. You have already completed the experiments that you
are reporting about. So they WERE done . . . they are NOT being done now as you write the
report. They are NOT going to be done as the reader reads further into the report. For example,
the experiment WAS carried out and the results ARE presented in Fig. X.
 Take a big picture view of the experiment; do not just regurgitate your logbook. Leave out the
irrelevant bits.
 Do not write instructions as if you are writing a laboratory manual.
 Do not write in dot point format. The writing must be in a narrative style.
 Put the report in context: why is the topic important?
 Do not derive formulae or include intermediate steps in calculations. Only include the main
equations, and explain their relevance.
 Equations should be numbered (with symbols used in equations defined in text).
 Figures should be numbered and informative captions included. Figures should be referred to in
the text, e.g. as shown in Fig X (not by location, such as “the figure below”). Captions should be
standalone and actually inform the reader without the need to search through the text.
 Ensure that figures clearly convey desired information. Ask yourself why you want to include
certain data, why they should be plotted in a particular way, and whether the chosen
presentation (markers, axis, etc.) allows the data to be understood clearly.
 Subject to the above point, generally you should not do join-the-dots plots for your graphs; they
do not convey any extra information. However, if you have more than one plot on the same
graph, then it may be appropriate to join the points or, better, use different plot symbols or
colours to distinguish the points.
 Graphs are preferable to tables, never both.
 Explain how you determined your errors. There must always be a reason for an error estimate.
Talk about the sources of error but don’t go over the top. Use errors to determine the correct
number of sig figs to include in your results. Express discrepancies in terms of errors, not as
small, large, fairly accurate, right order of magnitude, close to theoretical, X%, etc!
 Compare your experimental values with accepted values, or those of previous researchers.
Examine the assumptions that may underpin an accepted or theoretical value before writing off
your own results.
 Correctly use SI units. If in doubt there are some good online resources, such as
http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/checklist.html.
 The University Library has resources relevant to report writing:
http://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/content.php?pid=27818&sid=202364.

6 Updated: 2015-05-24