Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Chiba University (Japan), 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 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
16,972
co-authored works, 5 years
936
partner universities
66
partner countries
547
sustained deep ties
1.84
collaboration impact (FWCI)
90%
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 #285 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #403, Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #434 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on reach and sustained. Chiba University sits in the 51st percentile for reach and the 48th for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 97 of 107 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 20th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #974 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Japan and United States) carry about 79% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-132 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Hiroshima University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.0). 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.

499
h-index of the joint research base
5.8M
citations to co-authored work
1.84
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
16,972
co-authored works, 2021-2025
28
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.

Influence36th pctReach51st pctDiversity20th pctSustained48th pctImpact21st pctInternational29th pctBrokerage52nd pct

Chiba University is strongest on reach (51st percentile), sustained (48th) and influence (36th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 97 of 107 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (20th 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveInteEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight36th pct+7.9
Impact18% weight21st pct+3.8
Sustained18% weight48th pct+8.6
Reach16% weight51st pct+8.2
Diversity16% weight20th pct+3.2
International10% weight29th pct+2.9

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 & Astronomy285Nursing403Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ434Dentistry475Immunology & Microbiolโ€ฆ496Neuroscience521
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Chiba University's strongest connected fields are Physics & Astronomy #285, Nursing #403, Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #434. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Social Sciences, at world #974 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 #397 for connected research
67/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ605
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ533
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University479
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University460
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University459
Life Sciences
World #547 for connected research
54/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ317
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ231
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University160
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kanazawa University142
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University96
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #656 for connected research
45/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ555
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University342
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ MIT271
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University261
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University259
Social Sciences
World #974 for connected research
18/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ146
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ112
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University78
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kanazawa University63
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต University of Tsukuba55
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 yieldThe University of The University of Tokyo Medical and Hiroshima Universi
High yieldStandardLow yield

Hiroshima University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.0): a consortium waiting to happen. The University of Osaka, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo1,479 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka985 2.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University872 2.9Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University820 2.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University600 3.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University599 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต University of Tsukuba587 2.5Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University543 2.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University501 2.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo Medical and Dental University428 2.3Low yield
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‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 15,336
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 4,884
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 1,694
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 1,273
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 733
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 664
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 556
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Belgium 548

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo 1,479
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka 985
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University 872
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University 820
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University 600
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University 599
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต University of Tsukuba 587
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University 543

The network spans 66 countries and 936 universities, but the top two carry about 79% 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-85 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-132 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-110 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

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

Monash University is top-43 globally in Health Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

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.

Chiba University HospitalCenter for Forensic Mental Health, Chiba UniversityMAGIC Telescopes
Immunology and MicrobiologyMedicineChemistryPhysics and Astronomy

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.

Universidad de Santiago de ChileCL
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Beijing Jiaotong UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช University of WuppertalGermany
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ American UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ Prince of Songkla UniversityThailand
Immune Cell Function and InteractionLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisAsymmetric Synthesis and CatalysisAstrophysics and Cosmic PhenomenaSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology

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 Hiroshima University tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the social sciences 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 Chiba 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.