Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur (India), 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
15,621
co-authored works, 5 years
840
partner universities
69
partner countries
374
sustained deep ties
1.79
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
  • Strong on international and reach. Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur sits in the 38th percentile for international and the 33rd for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 94 of 104 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 14th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,063 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (India and United States) carry about 64% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-127 globally in Physical 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-150 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Lovely Professional University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.9). 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.

322
h-index of the joint research base
2.4M
citations to co-authored work
1.79
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
15,621
co-authored works, 2021-2025
32
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.

Influence14th pctReach33rd pctDiversity28th pctSustained22nd pctImpact20th pctInternational38th pctBrokerage51st pct

Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur is strongest on international (38th percentile), reach (33rd) and diversity (28th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 94 of 104 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (14th 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% weight14th pct+3.1
Impact18% weight20th pct+3.6
Sustained18% weight22nd pct+4.0
Reach16% weight33rd pct+5.3
Diversity16% weight28th pct+4.5
International10% weight38th pct+3.8

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.

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 #1063 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ All India Institute oโ€ฆ22
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ22
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Pittsbuโ€ฆ17
Peoples' Friendship Uโ€ฆ16
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Sโ€ฆ15
Life Sciences
World #1018 for connected research
15/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Academy of Scientificโ€ฆ27
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ18
๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Universitat Pompeu Faโ€ฆ13
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ10
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queโ€ฆ10
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #263 for connected research
78/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ243
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ240
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Sโ€ฆ221
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ186
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tata Institute of Funโ€ฆ179
Social Sciences
World #1015 for connected research
15/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ18
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ16
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง LSE16
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi15
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University13
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 yieldIndian Institute oIndian Institute oUniversity of SoutIndian Institute o
High yieldStandardLow yield

Lovely Professional University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.9): a consortium waiting to happen. Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.6: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Bombay236 1.6Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Delhi205 1.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Science Bangalore197 1.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu University177 2.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur169 2.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee160 1.6Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research136 1.6Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tata Institute of Fundamental Research125 1.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Madras100 2.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Southampton95 3.3Standard
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‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India 2,197
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,280
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 510
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 352
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 302
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 271
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 260
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 257

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Bombay 236
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Delhi 205
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 197
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu University 177
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur 169
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee 160
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research 136
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Tata Institute of Fundamental Research 125

The network spans 69 countries and 840 universities, but the top two carry about 64% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Africa 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‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-127 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

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง 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: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University United States · world top-8

Harvard University is top-62 globally in Physical 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.

EngineeringPhysics 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.

๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of ลรณdลบPoland
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Northeast Agricultural UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jiangsu University of Science and TechnologyChina
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China University of Petroleum, BeijingChina
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Marquette UniversityUnited States
Fluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsSemiconductor materials and devicesAntenna Design and AnalysisAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface TechnologiesSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis

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 Africa 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 Lovely Professional University tie into a consortium concept in Physical Sciences & Engineering.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence 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 Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur.

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.