I am a PhD student and today, a PRL paper has been published in which a part of its main section reports the same results as our arXiv preprint, that was submitted also to PRL (and to arXiv) at the end of 2019. They submitted their work after ours; however, our paper is still under review since the referees asked us for experiments to validate the theory and numerics. Furthermore, his work does not include experiments, is also mostly numerics and theory, and their analysis is not as exhaustive and detailed as ours. There are sentences in their work and even the plots that are pretty similar and some of them almost identical, and they even use the same name for a characteristic quantity that was used for the first time in our preprint. The thing is that they have only cited our preprint at the end of the paper as "Note added", not in the main section or even in the supplementary material where they also use almost identical sentences. I am 100% sure that they were aware of our preprint since day one since they read it in ResearchGate. It seems they wanted to include this result in their PRL at any cost, hoping that nothing happens since it is not a clear case of plagiarism and they succinctly added the note at the end of the Letter to cover their backs. Moreover, they did not publish any arXiv preprint of his work.

PRL is supposed to publish "new physics" and its standards are really high, so I cannot understand how PRL has permitted this publication.

I feel that this is a really bad practice, and I am strongly disappointed and sad, not just for my work, which in my eyes is a complete injustice, but for science. Indeed, the group that publishes this work used to be a big name in the field, so I feel that we cannot do much to solve this. My PhD advisor thinks that probably the only thing we can accomplish is an erratum from this group in PRL.

What do you think is the best way to proceed? Do you think it is possible that PRL retracts the work?

  • 3
    How did PRL respond? Oct 30, 2020 at 3:57
  • What happened later, please?
    – xiaohuamao
    Jul 19, 2022 at 7:53
  • Seems like the Princeton PRL incident. A Princeton group was likely plagiarized.
    – High GPA
    Aug 16, 2023 at 10:43

2 Answers 2


(too long for a comment)

I would contact the authors of the suspected plagiarism and demand an explanation in the politest possible way. Try not to imply that you're certain your paper was plagiarized, but ask instead if, by citing your paper, whether or not they are aware that your conclusions are so similar. I would also add that you have sent the paper to the same journal, which being a PRL should be rather obvious due to the length limitations.

If you are sure their submission date to PRL comes after you submitted your pre-print to ArXiv, and that they were also aware of it, then you have proof that you were the first to make those results public. I believe if the authors do not respond well to your email you have good chances of contacting the PRL editorial board and, using your pre-print as proof, claim that you were plagiarized.

The best case scenario is to be able to solve your problems with the authors of the other paper, but to be honest I'm not sure most human beings would respond well to this situation. Maybe you'll have to get in touch with the board. If I were you, I would definitely not leave things as be, and would insist until the matter was solved (even if legal measures are needed).

  • 2
    Contacting the other authors is pointless. May 20, 2020 at 2:14
  • 4
    It is good etiquette before contacting the editorial board. I'm a polite person. May 20, 2020 at 2:25
  • Let me rephrase that: Demanding an explanation is pointless if you have already decided that plagiarism took place. You can offer them the opportunity to retract the paper before you make a complaint to the editors. That might be polite. May 20, 2020 at 3:31
  • Yep. It's included in the answer. This is the best case scenario. A polite communication with the authors leads, in the best case scenario, to a solution that doesn't involve the editorial board. It needs to be polite, otherwise it will be taken as an accusation. If one wants to accuse, jump to contacting the board. If one wants to at least attempt a more peaceful solution, contact the authors. This is pretty much my answer. May 20, 2020 at 4:03
  • 1
    Thank you for all your comments and suggestions. Yesterday we wonder if contacting the senior researcher was a good a idea, but we have references from colleagues that have dealt with him, and its not a good idea. Maybe is a good option just to have a proof that we have been polite. But as I said in the comment below, I think what we are going to do is to complete a good revision, polish and improve our paper, and write a letter to the editors explaining what has happened with facts. Let's see what they decide. Thank you so much again!
    – stokes
    May 20, 2020 at 17:06

When there is clear-cut copying as you describe, you can contact the journal editor and show them what was copied. The journal should investigate and retract the paper.

What is most important to you is that you complete the revisions and get your paper resubmitted. The other paper has no effect on the acceptance of your paper because it was submitted later.

  • Thank you for comment and suggestion. This is actually what we are going to do. So let's see what the editors decide. Thank you again!
    – stokes
    May 20, 2020 at 17:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .