<p>From the information I could find online, I assume that the purpose of "Physics Today" is to summarize the incredibly vast field of physics and promote results that are considered important enough to be known from researchers with a different specialization from the subject matter. The focus is also on newly published results, rather than re-examining classical ones or establishing a "must-know" basis.</p>

<p>With this assumption, I believe the answer is no. The field has embraced Web technologies to a degree where results are usually known months before their official publishing in conferences and years before the journal version is out, with preprints being available typically via <a href="http://arxiv.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">arxiv</a> and rigorous discussions being held in popular blogs (for example <a href="https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Lipton&amp;Regan</a>, <a href="http://blog.computationalcomplexity.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Fortnow&amp;Gasarch</a> , <a href="http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Aaronson</a> ), <a href="https://sites.google.com/site/plustcs/rss-feeds" rel="nofollow noreferrer">TCS+</a> and questions appearing on this site as well.</p>

<p>Perhaps the one that comes the closest is <a href="http://jacm.acm.org/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Journal of the ACM (JACM)</a>.</p>

<p>See also this <a href="https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/27972/some-good-theoretical-computer-science-journals">question</a>.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-04-06T01:37:17.430Z
What about Comm. ACM?
Joshua Grochow
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-04-06T02:47:59.827Z
CACM is a good example for general CS, but theory is only part of the journal's focus. Furthermore, it is more of a scientific magazine than a scientific [journal](http://dl.acm.org/pubs.cfm) according to ACM itself. On the other hand, the format resembles that of Physics Today. In the end, I believe it is a subjective issue of what type of content is desired. I've read some really thought provoking CACM articles and editorials, but from my personal experience not many researchers use it to keep up with new advances, due to the existence of the aforementioned web tools available.
chazisop
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-04-06T03:11:41.750Z
Ah, right - I missed the fact that the Q was about *Theoretical* CS. But J. ACM isn't just about Theoretical CS either... Also, I'm not sure many people use Physics Today for that purpose, for the same reason...
Joshua Grochow
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-04-06T20:53:35.227Z
Thanks for the comments, I will accept chazisop's answer. As for Physics Today, it kind of occupies a nice intermediate position between magazine and a journal. It is the kind of place a serious physics undergrad could find the problems studied by research level physics explained in a language that is not too simplistic but is not so technical that only active researchers would understand it. I was hoping to find something similar for theoretical CS.
user38394
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-04-05T20:52:17.260Z
2016-04-05T20:52:17.260Z
2017-04-13T12:32:28.077Z
chazisop
<p>Are there some popular journals in the field of theoretical CS that serve the kind of purpose that a journal like "Physics Today" does for the Physics community ? </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-04-08T15:44:50.107Z
try [blogs](http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/22191/what-cs-blogs-should-everyone-read) for this purpose, increasingly some are associated with professional societies and research institutes. also [Quanta](https://www.quantamagazine.org/category/computer-science-2/) (Simons foundation supported) is excellent in this area.
vzn
<soft-question>
Popular Journals for Theoretical CS
user38394
# Popular Journals for Theoretical CS

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-04-05)

Are there some popular journals in the field of theoretical CS that serve the kind of purpose that a journal like "Physics Today" does for the Physics community ?

**Tags:** soft-question
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: try [blogs](http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/22191/what-cs-blogs-should-everyone-read) for this purpose, increasingly some are associated with professional societies and research institutes. also [Quanta](https://www.quantamagazine.org/category/computer-science-2/) (Simons foundation supported) is excellent in this area.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2016-04-05. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

From the information I could find online, I assume that the purpose of "Physics Today" is to summarize the incredibly vast field of physics and promote results that are considered important enough to be known from researchers with a different specialization from the subject matter. The focus is also on newly published results, rather than re-examining classical ones or establishing a "must-know" basis.

With this assumption, I believe the answer is no. The field has embraced Web technologies to a degree where results are usually known months before their official publishing in conferences and years before the journal version is out, with preprints being available typically via [arxiv](http://arxiv.org/) and rigorous discussions being held in popular blogs (for example [Lipton&Regan](https://rjlipton.wordpress.com/), [Fortnow&Gasarch](http://blog.computationalcomplexity.org/) , [Aaronson](http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/) ), [TCS+](https://sites.google.com/site/plustcs/rss-feeds) and questions appearing on this site as well.

Perhaps the one that comes the closest is [Journal of the ACM (JACM)](http://jacm.acm.org/).

See also this [question](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/27972/some-good-theoretical-computer-science-journals).

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: What about Comm. ACM?  
> **username_2**: CACM is a good example for general CS, but theory is only part of the journal's focus. Furthermore, it is more of a scientific magazine than a scientific [journal](http://dl.acm.org/pubs.cfm) according to ACM itself. On the other hand, the format resembles that of Physics Today. In the end, I believe it is a subjective issue of what type of content is desired. I've read some really thought provoking CACM articles and editorials, but from my personal experience not many researchers use it to keep up with new advances, due to the existence of the aforementioned web tools available.  
> **username_3**: Ah, right - I missed the fact that the Q was about *Theoretical* CS. But J. ACM isn't just about Theoretical CS either... Also, I'm not sure many people use Physics Today for that purpose, for the same reason...  
> **username_0**: Thanks for the comments, I will accept chazisop's answer. As for Physics Today, it kind of occupies a nice intermediate position between magazine and a journal. It is the kind of place a serious physics undergrad could find the problems studied by research level physics explained in a language that is not too simplistic but is not so technical that only active researchers would understand it. I was hoping to find something similar for theoretical CS.  

---

