Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Hubei 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.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
15,430
co-authored works, 5 years
785
partner universities
62
partner countries
388
sustained deep ties
2.80
collaboration impact (FWCI)
84%
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 impact and influence. Hubei University sits in the 65th percentile for impact and the 58th for influence: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 88 of 104 partners (84%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 13th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #982 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 92% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-150 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-84 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Central China Normal University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.2). 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.

294
h-index of the joint research base
1.7M
citations to co-authored work
2.80
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
15,430
co-authored works, 2021-2025
30
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.

Influence58th pctReach24th pctDiversity13th pctSustained24th pctImpact65th pctInternational21st pctBrokerage9th pct

Hubei University is strongest on impact (65th percentile), influence (58th) and sustained (24th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 88 of 104 partners (84%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (13th 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.

InflImpaSustReacEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight58th pct+12.8
Impact18% weight65th pct+11.7
Sustained18% weight24th pct+4.3
Reach16% weight24th pct+3.8
Diversity16% weight13th pct+2.1
International10% weight21st pct+2.1

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 #982 for connected research
18/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University o…425
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University421
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University133
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University117
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…111
Life Sciences
World #525 for connected research
56/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University588
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University o…367
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong Agricultural…318
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University224
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University222
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #485 for connected research
60/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University1,017
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University o…614
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University of T…422
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China University of G…280
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese…224
Social Sciences
World #962 for connected research
20/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University190
πŸ‡³πŸ‡± Radboud University Ni…58
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University o…57
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Central China Normal …52
πŸ‡§πŸ‡ͺ Ghent University48
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 yieldWuhan UniversityHuazhong UniversitCentral China NormZhejiang Universit
High yieldStandardLow yield

Central China Normal University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.2): a consortium waiting to happen. Sun Yat-sen University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.7: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University1,923 3.3Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University of Science and Technology1,251 2.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University of Technology473 2.6Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong Agricultural University453 3.1Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University420 2.5Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences401 3.2Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China University of Geosciences292 2.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Central China Normal University251 4.2High yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Sun Yat-sen University243 1.7Low yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University240 1.6Low 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

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 14,524
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 1,261
πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Hong Kong SAR 396
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 291
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 282
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 150
πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡¬ Singapore 149
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 136

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University 1,923
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong University of Science and Technology 1,251
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University of Technology 473
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Huazhong Agricultural University 453
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Peking University 420
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences 401
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China University of Geosciences 292
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Central China Normal University 251

The network spans 62 countries and 785 universities, but the top two carry about 92% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (2 of the region's 100 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.

πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-150 globally in Physical 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-84 globally in Physical 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-93 globally in Physical 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-97 globally in Physical 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.

The Central Hospital of Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture
EnergyEngineeringMaterials ScienceBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology

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.

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ University of Alaska FairbanksUnited States
Tarbiat Modares UniversityIR
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeast Normal UniversityChina
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nantong UniversityChina
Al-Azhar UniversityEG
Advanced Photocatalysis TechniquesAdvancements in Battery MaterialsSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFerroelectric and Piezoelectric MaterialsPerovskite Materials and ApplicationsAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques

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 CUHK and a Europe 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 Central China Normal University tie into a consortium concept in Physical Sciences & Engineering.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the health & medicine 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 Hubei 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.