Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Georgia State University (United States), a Silver-band university.  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—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
16,370
co-authored works, 5 years
967
partner universities
74
partner countries
604
sustained deep ties
2.63
collaboration impact (FWCI)
88%
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
  • Strong on sustained and reach. Georgia State University sits in the 57th percentile for sustained and the 57th for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 131 of 149 partners (88%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 32nd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #962 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 China) carry about 83% 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 CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Minnesota returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 8.2). 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.

519
h-index of the joint research base
3.4M
citations to co-authored work
2.63
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
16,370
co-authored works, 2021-2025
42
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.

Influence52nd pctReach57th pctDiversity46th pctSustained57th pctImpact55th pctInternational32nd pctBrokerage29th pct

Georgia State University is strongest on sustained (57th percentile), reach (57th) and impact (55th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 131 of 149 partners (88%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (32nd 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight52nd pct+11.4
Impact18% weight55th pct+9.9
Sustained18% weight57th pct+10.3
Reach16% weight57th pct+9.1
Diversity16% weight46th pct+7.4
International10% weight32nd pct+3.2

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.

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 #691 for connected research
42/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University509
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of โ€ฆ215
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University95
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ70
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ69
Life Sciences
World #762 for connected research
36/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University911
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of โ€ฆ842
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University133
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ107
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University101
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #962 for connected research
20/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of โ€ฆ201
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University180
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan88
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University71
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stony Brook University71
Social Sciences
World #228 for connected research
81/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University242
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Missouri154
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of โ€ฆ148
National Research Uniโ€ฆ124
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Arizona State Universโ€ฆ123
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 yieldEmory UniversityGeorgia Institute University of Minn
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Minnesota returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 8.2): a consortium waiting to happen. Tulane University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.3: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University1,485 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of Technology1,065 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University256 4.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan210 3.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University194 3.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill186 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia186 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Arizona State University170 4.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Irvine150 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Minnesota141 8.2High 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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 13,222
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 1,321
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 936
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 513
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 486
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 433
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 417
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 297

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University 1,485
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgia Institute of Technology 1,065
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 256
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan 210
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University 194
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 186
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Georgia 186
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Arizona State University 170

The network spans 74 countries and 967 universities, but the top two carry about 83% 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‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-130 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 University of Edinburgh United Kingdom · world top-9

University of Edinburgh is top-68 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‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Nanyang Technological University Singapore · world top-14

Nanyang Technological University is top-280 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.

Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science
NeurosciencePhysics and AstronomyPsychologyBusiness, Management and Accounting

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.

Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz UniversitySA
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น University of MessinaItaly
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Universitรฉ Gustave EiffelFrance
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡น BOKU UniversityAustria
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต University of TsukubaJapan
Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchCorporate Finance and GovernanceFiscal Policy and Economic Growth

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 University of Minnesota tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international 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 Georgia State 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 rivals.

Partner fact file · locked

Unlocked for partners. Confirm before 12:00, 22 July 2026 to be included at the 1 September launch.

Claim your fact file →

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 rivals.

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 rivals with Recognition, five with Partnership, up to ten with Flagship.

Your research, in front of 172,000 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

172,000
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 1 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.