Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Hebei University (China), 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
16,987
co-authored works, 5 years
652
partner universities
60
partner countries
340
sustained deep ties
2.23
collaboration impact (FWCI)
85%
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
  • Energy is the standout field. Ranked #499 in the world for connected research, with Chemical Engineering #517, Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #601 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. Hebei University sits in the 46th percentile for influence and the 35th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 89 of 105 partners (85%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 6th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,020 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (China and United States) carry about 89% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-181 globally in Life 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-218 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. China Agricultural University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 9.2). 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.

247
h-index of the joint research base
1.3M
citations to co-authored work
2.23
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
16,987
co-authored works, 2021-2025
16
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.

Influence46th pctReach10th pctDiversity10th pctSustained18th pctImpact35th pctInternational6th pctBrokerage11th pct

Hebei University is strongest on influence (46th percentile), impact (35th) and sustained (18th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 89 of 105 partners (85%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (6th 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 global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight46th pct+10.1
Impact18% weight35th pct+6.3
Sustained18% weight18th pct+3.2
Reach16% weight10th pct+1.6
Diversity16% weight10th pct+1.6
International10% weight6th pct+0.6

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#1000Energy499Chemical Engineering517Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ601Physics & Astronomy620Materials Science629Agricultural & Biologiโ€ฆ664
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Hebei University's strongest connected fields are Energy #499, Chemical Engineering #517, Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #601. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Social Sciences, at world #1,020 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 #908 for connected research
24/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chinese Academy of Meโ€ฆ92
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University85
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Hebei Medical Universโ€ฆ83
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Capital Medical Univeโ€ฆ70
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chineseโ€ฆ53
Life Sciences
World #345 for connected research
71/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chineseโ€ฆ228
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University128
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China Agricultural Unโ€ฆ125
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chinese Academy of Meโ€ฆ110
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Hebei Medical Universโ€ฆ81
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #432 for connected research
64/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chineseโ€ฆ617
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ North China Electric โ€ฆ459
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nankai University447
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University394
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Beihang University388
Social Sciences
World #1020 for connected research
15/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Beijing Normal Univerโ€ฆ19
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tianjin University16
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University15
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Shandong University11
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ South China Normal Unโ€ฆ11
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 yieldUniversity of ChinPeking UniversitySouthwest UniversiChina Agricultural
High yieldStandardLow yield

China Agricultural University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 9.2): a consortium waiting to happen. North China Electric Power University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.1: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences550 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University276 4.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nankai University218 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tianjin University213 2.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ North China Electric Power University197 2.1Low yield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College192 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southwest University187 0.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tsinghua University171 4.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Hebei Medical University144 2.1Low yield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China Agricultural University139 9.2High 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‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 8,326
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 794
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 256
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 247
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 183
๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Hong Kong SAR 150
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 144
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 116

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences 550
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Peking University 276
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nankai University 218
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tianjin University 213
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ North China Electric Power University 197
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College 192
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southwest University 187
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tsinghua University 171

The network spans 60 countries and 652 universities, but the top two carry about 89% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the North America white-space (6 of the region's 62 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‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-181 globally in Life 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-218 globally in Life 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 College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-22 globally in Life 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-47 globally in Life 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.

Earth and Planetary SciencesMaterials ScienceBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyEngineering

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.

Universiti Teknologi MARAMY
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Xiangtan UniversityChina
Peoples' Friendship University of RussiaRU
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Taiyuan University of TechnologyChina
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Dalian Maritime UniversityChina
Subterranean biodiversity and taxonomyLuminescence Properties of Advanced MaterialsSpider Taxonomy and Behavior StudiesGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsOrthoptera Research and Taxonomy

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 HKU and a North America 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 China Agricultural University tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international 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 Hebei 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.