PHYSICS-XPH11 · Pearson Edexcel International AS Level
PHYSICS-XPH11/11
Paper 1
Physics · Winter 2025 · Variant 1
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: Pearson Edexcel
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.5 / 5
80
90 min
Waves and Particle Nature of Light
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
80
Duration
90 min
Session difficulty
3.5 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
Marks were highly concentrated in the high-tariff calculation questions.
In Question 18(b), candidates had to compute the total energy incident on a screen from UV intensity given in mW cm−2\text{mW cm}^{-2}mW cm−2.
Many candidates stumbled during unit conversion; the most elegant method was keeping dimensions in centimeters (calculating area as 7.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm27.15 \text{ cm} \times 14.7 \text{ cm} = 105 \text{ cm}^27.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm2) and multiplying directly by 50 mW cm−250 \text{ mW cm}^{-2}50 mW cm−2 to get 5.25 W5.25 \text{ W}5.25 W.
Another typical trap lay in Question 13(a), where the path length of the ultrasound pulse required doubling to account for the reflection trip before comparing it with the pulse duration.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
Mathematical
Weight: 6100%Conceptual Explanation
Weight: 583%Analysis & G
Weight: 350%Practical Application
Weight: 233%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
Examiner report — national grade boundaries and question-level commentary
Level A
Approx. 80% of maximum mark
Level B
Approx. 70% of maximum mark
Level C
Approx. 60% of maximum mark
Level D
Approx. 50% of maximum mark
Level E
Approx. 40% of maximum mark
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Show formula, substitution, and unit; method marks need visible working.
Match the expected response style for “Determine” questions.
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Match the expected response style for “Deduce” questions.
Match the expected response style for “Show” questions.
Match the expected response style for “State” questions.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
Apply knowledge to an unfamiliar context; concise, practical points score best.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 1.2
Min per mark: 1.1
Min per mark: 1
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Waves and Particle Nature of Light
55 marks this session
Electric Circuits
25 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Waves and Particle Nature of Light
Mechanics
Materials
Electric Circuits
Mechanics (Mechanics and Materials)
Waves and Particle Nature of Light (Waves and Electricity)
Electric Circuits (Waves and Electricity)
Materials (Mechanics and Materials)
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
WPH12/01 Waves and Electricity:
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
Waves and Particle Nature of Light
55 marks this session
Practise in RevuiElectric Circuits
25 marks this session
Practise in RevuiPhysics
Session priority from examiner report
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
Marks were highly concentrated in the high-tariff calculation questions.
- 2Message
In Question 18(b), candidates had to compute the total energy incident on a screen from UV intensity given in mW cm−2\text{mW cm}^{-2}mW cm−2.
- 3Message
Many candidates stumbled during unit conversion; the most elegant method was keeping dimensions in centimeters (calculating area as 7.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm27.15 \text{ cm} \times 14.7 \text{ cm} = 105 \text{ cm}^27.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm2) and multiplying directly by 50 mW cm−250 \text{ mW cm}^{-2}50 mW cm−2 to get 5.25 W5.25 \text{ W}5.25 W.
- 4Message
Another typical trap lay in Question 13(a), where the path length of the ultrasound pulse required doubling to account for the reflection trip before comparing it with the pulse duration.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
Winter 2025 2025
Physics
Marks were highly concentrated in the high-tariff calculation questions. In Question 18(b), candidates had to compute the total energy incident on a screen from UV intensity given in mW cm−2\text{mW cm}^{-2}mW cm−2. Many candidates stumbled during unit conversion; the most elegan
Marks were highly concentrated in the high-tariff calculation questions.
In Question 18(b), candidates had to compute the total energy incident on a screen from UV intensity given in mW cm−2\text{mW cm}^{-2}mW cm−2.
Many candidates stumbled during unit conversion; the most elegant method was keeping dimensions in centimeters (calculating area as 7.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm27.15 \text{ cm} \times 14.7 \text{ cm} = 105 \text{ cm}^27.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm2) and multiplying directly by 50 mW cm−250 \text{ mW cm}^{-2}50 mW cm−2 to get 5.25 W5.25 \text{ W}5.25 W.
- Total marks
- 80
- Duration
- 90 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.5 / 5
Session analysis
Marks were highly concentrated in the high-tariff calculation questions. In Question 18(b), candidates had to compute the total energy incident on a screen from UV intensity given in mW cm−2\text{mW cm}^{-2}mW cm−2. Many candidates stumbled during unit conversion; the most elegant method was keeping dimensions in centimeters (calculating area as 7.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm27.15 \text{ cm} \times 14.7 \text{ cm} = 105 \text{ cm}^27.15 cm×14.7 cm=105 cm2) and multiplying directly by 50 mW cm−250 \text{ mW cm}^{-2}50 mW cm−2 to get 5.25 W5.25 \text{ W}5.25 W. Another typical trap lay in Question 13(a), where the path length of the ultrasound pulse required doubling to account for the reflection trip before comparing it with the pulse duration. Failing to use this factor of 2 was a major source of dropped marks.
Updated Jun 12, 2026
Paper breakdown
WPH12/01 Waves and Electricity:
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
85% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
Structured/Short Answer & Calculations
(Section B)
70·8·88%
Multiple Choice
(Section A)
10·10·13%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Difficulty trend
Compare difficulty across recent years.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Section A (MCQs)
1.00 m/minSection B (Q11-14,
0.89 m/minSection B (Q15-18,
0.87 m/minTotal marks
80
Total time
90 min
Avg pace
0.89
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
Young's Double-Slit Interference
90%90%
I-V characteristics of Diodes and Filament Lamps
85%85%
Critical Angle and Total Internal Reflection in optical fibers
80%80%
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.