Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Brandeis University (United States), ranked in the global index.  See a world-leading example (Oxford) →

The enhanced fact file

Your entire collaboration network, read like a strategist would.

Not a scorecard. A dossier that tells a university leader exactly where the strengths, the risks and the fundable opportunities are, every figure sourced from the open research record.

โ—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
6,118
co-authored works, 5 years
673
partner universities
64
partner countries
303
sustained deep ties
3.41
collaboration impact (FWCI)
81%
of partners non-redundant

The one-screen strategic read

Where you stand, at a glance.

The first thing a leader needs is not more data, it is a verdict. Three strengths to lead with, three challenges to manage, three opportunities to act on, each drawn straight from the network below.

Strengths
  • Physics & Astronomy is the standout field. Ranked #405 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #521, Neuroscience #573 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. Brandeis University sits in the 87th percentile for impact and the 58th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 121 of 149 partners (81%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Reach is the softest pillar. At the 11th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,133 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (United States and United Kingdom) carry about 74% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win Monash University. World top-7. Monash University is top-52 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Brown University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 6.4). Formalise it into a funded consortium to compound impact, not just volume.

Scholarly weight

The impact behind the network

Collaboration only counts if the work lands. This is the citation weight of everything produced with partners, the substance under the network.

649
h-index of the joint research base
5.5M
citations to co-authored work
3.41
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
6,118
co-authored works, 2021-2025
48
collaboration efficiency, impact per tie

Visualisation 1

Your collaboration profile

Seven pillars, each shown as a global percentile. The dashed ring marks the top-decile benchmark; anything inside it is a genuine, defensible strength.

Influence24th pctReach11th pctDiversity16th pctSustained12th pctImpact87th pctInternational58th pctBrokerage2nd pct

Brandeis University is strongest on impact (87th percentile), international (58th) and influence (24th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 121 of 149 partners (81%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Reach (11th percentile), the softest of the six and the clearest place to build.

Source: the open global research record, co-authored works 2021–2025, fractional counting

The anatomy of your standing

Exactly what your position is built from

Six pillars, each weighted, combine into one standing index. Nothing is hidden: this is the entire calculation, in a single bar.

InflImpaDiveInteEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight24th pct+5.3
Impact18% weight87th pct+15.7
Sustained18% weight12th pct+2.2
Reach16% weight11th pct+1.8
Diversity16% weight16th pct+2.6
International10% weight58th pct+5.8

Brokerage is reported alongside as a diagnostic, not folded into the score, so a university cannot inflate its standing simply by publishing widely. It measures whether you connect communities that would otherwise stay apart.

Visualisation 2

Where you lead the world, by field

Each subject placed on a log scale of world rank (1 to 1,195). The further left, the more globally central. Gold marks a top-50 standout, blue a solid position.

#1#10#100#1000Physics & Astronomy405Nursing521Neuroscience573Mathematics610Economics, Econometricโ€ฆ669Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ676
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Brandeis University's strongest connected fields are Physics & Astronomy #405, Nursing #521, Neuroscience #573. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #1,133 in the deep-dive below, is the clear at-risk area, exactly the gap this chart surfaces.

Source: subject-level indices, 26 fields, minimum 50-university gate

Discipline deep-dive

How you collaborate, faculty by faculty

The same network split into its four broad domains, each with its world rank for connected research and the five partners it leans on most. This is the view a dean or pro-vice-chancellor acts on.

Health & Medicine
World #1054 for connected research
12/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University127
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Boston University92
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University76
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ51
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Tufts University43
Life Sciences
World #1066 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University102
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ MIT55
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan44
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago42
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University40
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1133 for connected research
5/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University447
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Universitรฉ Paris Citรฉ438
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago438
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Toronto437
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Sorbonne Universitรฉ426
Social Sciences
World #862 for connected research
28/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University75
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ New York University36
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Boston University35
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan32
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ30
Source: domain-level co-authorship, partner institutions 2021–2025

Visualisation 3

Which partnerships actually pay off

Every anchor partner plotted by collaboration volume against the citation impact of the joint work. The prize quadrant is top-right: high volume and high impact. The bottom-right is the trap: a lot of output, little impact.

Joint works (collaboration volume) →Impact (FWCI) →high yieldHarvard UniversityBoston UniversityBrown UniversityUniversity of Toro
High yieldStandardLow yield

Brown University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 6.4): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Toronto, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University259 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Boston University146 2.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ New York University101 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University89 6.4High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan86 4.5High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Oklahoma81 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago77 4.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Toronto71 1.9Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University70 3.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Massachusetts Institute of Technology69 3.2Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 3,906
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 467
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 422
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 294
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 262
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 242
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Israel 169
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 116

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 259
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Boston University 146
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ New York University 101
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Brown University 89
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan 86
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Oklahoma 81
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago 77
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Toronto 71

The network spans 64 countries and 673 universities, but the top two carry about 74% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Middle East white-space (0 of the region's 2 leading collaborators) is the clearest gap to close.

Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 6

The partners to win next

Not a generic wish-list. Globally central universities you are not yet deeply partnered with, each with the reason it matters and the specific programme that would fund the collaboration.

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-52 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง King's College London United Kingdom · world top-10

King's College London is top-48 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland Australia · world top-12

The University of Queensland is top-99 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

Source: network white-space analysis + funder-programme mapping

The research base

The ecosystem behind the collaboration

A partnership does not plug into a name, it plugs into a base: the affiliated hospitals, presses, institutes and archives, and the research themes where the joint work concentrates.

Physics and AstronomyNeuroscience

Context

Your competitive set, and your signature research

Benchmarked against

The named peer group your fact file compares you to, pillar by pillar and subject by subject.

University of PecsHU
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ SRM Institute of Science and TechnologyIndia
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Arkansas for Medical SciencesUnited States
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Czech Technical University in PragueCzechia
Istanbul Technical UniversityTR
Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsParticle Detector Development and PerformanceNeurobiology and Insect Physiology ResearchNeural dynamics and brain function

From insight to action

A 90-day plan, written from the data.

The dossier ends where a strategy meeting begins: three moves, sequenced, each pointing back to a specific finding above.

0-30 days
Name the target

Adopt NUS and a Middle East hub as formal partnership targets; brief the relevant deans with the joint white-space evidence.

30-60 days
Open the funding route

Scope the specific programme for each target, and turn the Brown University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the reach gap and the physical sciences & engineering weakness; set a diversification target for the long tail; and secure an editorial feature in the reputation-survey window.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for Brandeis University.

Everything above is the open view. The full partner fact file goes further: every ranked subject and subfield, the complete partner ledger with yield, your named academics and their signature work, the funder-by-funder route map for each target, and this same dossier on up to ten named peers.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, Tuesday 25 August 2026 to be included at the 15 September launch.

See the full enhanced fact file → Claim & verify yours

Free to claim and verify your data. No obligation. Your ranking is unaffected by partnership, and always will be.

Exclusive to partners

Plus this same dossier on up to 10 of your peers.

Every partnership includes the full intelligence on your named competitive set, their strengths, their funders, their white-space, so you can see exactly where you lead and where to close the gap. Two peers with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 170,000 academics, with full reporting.

Partnership also places your research as editorial features in the Research Network Report, our newsletter to a verified global academic audience, timed to the reputation-survey season. Every send comes with a full performance report: opens, clicks and geography, benchmarked against the edition.

The Research Network Report

170,000
verified academic subscribers worldwide
Nov–Jan
timed to the reputation-survey season
Full report
opens, clicks and geography on every feature

See your own dossier, built for your university.

Submit your data and we will build and review your enhanced fact file with you, then show exactly how a partnership turns it into advantage, before the index goes public on 15 September 2026.

Request a partnership conversation →
Global Research Partnerships · globalresearchpartnerships.com/rci · Built on the open global research record and the award data of the world's major funders. Methodology.