Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Kent State University (United States), 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 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
8,679
co-authored works, 5 years
848
partner universities
68
partner countries
431
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
  • Physics & Astronomy is the standout field. Ranked #424 in the world for connected research, with Mathematics #431, Social Sciences #601 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. Kent State University sits in the 55th percentile for impact and the 51st for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 104 of 119 partners (88%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 18th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,076 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 81% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-94 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • 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.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. The Ohio State University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.7). 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.

513
h-index of the joint research base
2.6M
citations to co-authored work
2.63
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
8,679
co-authored works, 2021-2025
45
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.

Influence18th pctReach34th pctDiversity25th pctSustained31st pctImpact55th pctInternational51st pctBrokerage49th pct

Kent State University is strongest on impact (55th percentile), international (51st) and reach (34th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 104 of 119 partners (88%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (18th 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% weight18th pct+4.0
Impact18% weight55th pct+9.9
Sustained18% weight31st pct+5.6
Reach16% weight34th pct+5.4
Diversity16% weight25th pct+4.0
International10% weight51st pct+5.1

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.

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 & Astronomy424Mathematics431Social Sciences601Computer Sci.603Business, Management &โ€ฆ625Energy666
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Kent State University's strongest connected fields are Physics & Astronomy #424, Mathematics #431, Social Sciences #601. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #1,076 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 #993 for connected research
17/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve โ€ฆ68
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The Ohio State Univerโ€ฆ56
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Connectโ€ฆ22
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Kent22
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University School20
Life Sciences
World #1076 for connected research
10/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve โ€ฆ34
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University28
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University โ€“ โ€ฆ23
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ George Washington Uniโ€ฆ20
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Icahn School of Medicโ€ฆ20
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1010 for connected research
16/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University159
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The Ohio State Univerโ€ฆ147
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago128
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Houston128
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Texas A&M University124
Social Sciences
World #686 for connected research
43/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Kent67
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State Unโ€ฆ58
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve โ€ฆ50
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Arizona State Universโ€ฆ45
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The Ohio State Univerโ€ฆ41
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 Ohio State UniCase Western ReserTexas A&M Universi
High yieldStandardLow yield

The Ohio State University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.7): a consortium waiting to happen. Case Western Reserve University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.6: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The Ohio State University216 5.7High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve University186 1.6Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University156 4.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University145 5.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Kentucky142 5.5High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Houston133 6.5High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago132 5.6High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Michigan State University130 6.7High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Texas A&M University129 8.0High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The University of Texas at Austin113 7.2High 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 6,091
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 1,175
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 497
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 377
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 235
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 219
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India 199
๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Poland 183

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The Ohio State University 216
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve University 186
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University 156
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southeast University 145
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Kentucky 142
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Houston 133
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago 132
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Michigan State University 130

The network spans 68 countries and 848 universities, but the top two carry about 81% 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‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-94 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 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‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-52 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.

Materials SciencePhysics and AstronomyPsychology

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‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Fujian Normal UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท Ewha Womans UniversitySouth Korea
๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Universidad Rey Juan CarlosSpain
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ท National Technical University of AthensGreece
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท Chonnam National UniversitySouth Korea
Liquid Crystal Research AdvancementsQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentPhotonic Crystals and Applications

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 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 The Ohio State University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence gap and the life 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 Kent 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 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.