Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Kindai University (Japan), 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
11,153
co-authored works, 5 years
678
partner universities
64
partner countries
321
sustained deep ties
1.89
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
  • Medicine is the standout field. Ranked #517 in the world for connected research, with Physics & Astronomy #679, Immunology & Microbiology #728 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and influence. Kindai University sits in the 23rd percentile for impact and the 18th for influence: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 53 of 63 partners (85%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 10th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,072 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Japan and United States) carry about 81% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-146 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Hiroshima University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.7). 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.

373
h-index of the joint research base
2.3M
citations to co-authored work
1.89
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
11,153
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.

Influence18th pctReach12th pctDiversity16th pctSustained16th pctImpact23rd pctInternational10th pctBrokerage11th pct

Kindai University is strongest on impact (23rd percentile), influence (18th) and sustained (16th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 53 of 63 partners (85%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (10th 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% weight18th pct+4.0
Impact18% weight23rd pct+4.1
Sustained18% weight16th pct+2.9
Reach16% weight12th pct+1.9
Diversity16% weight16th pct+2.6
International10% weight10th pct+1.0

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#1000Medicine517Physics & Astronomy679Immunology & Microbiolโ€ฆ728Chemical Engineering761Chemistry777Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ807
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Kindai University's strongest connected fields are Medicine #517, Physics & Astronomy #679, Immunology & Microbiology #728. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Social Sciences, at world #1,072 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 #531 for connected research
56/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ609
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University556
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University354
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kobe University325
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University311
Life Sciences
World #772 for connected research
35/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ186
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University165
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ103
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Okayama University75
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kobe University71
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #883 for connected research
26/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University267
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ171
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University156
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ143
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University121
Social Sciences
World #1072 for connected research
10/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University30
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ29
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kobe University25
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University17
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University17
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 University of Kyoto UniversityHiroshima UniversiKyoto Prefectural
High yieldStandardLow yield

Hiroshima University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.7): a consortium waiting to happen. The University of Osaka, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka897 2.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University884 2.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University500 2.6Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo438 4.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kobe University424 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University409 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University403 3.0Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University387 3.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Juntendo University283 4.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hiroshima University258 4.7Standard
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‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 9,961
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,343
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 623
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 518
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 451
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 398
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 376
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 343

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka 897
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University 884
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University 500
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo 438
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kobe University 424
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University 409
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University 403
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University 387

The network spans 64 countries and 678 universities, but the top two carry about 81% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (3 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.

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-146 globally in Health 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‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-85 globally in Health 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 Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-29 globally in Health 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-8 globally in Health 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.

Kindai University HospitalKindai University Sakai HospitalKindai University Nara Hospital
MedicineEngineeringSocial Sciences

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.

National Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTW
Budapest University of Technology and EconomicsHU
University of BaghdadIQ
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Academy of Scientific and Innovative ResearchIndia
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Southwest Petroleum UniversityChina
Lung Cancer Treatments and MutationsHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisMilitary Technology and StrategiesLegal and Regulatory AnalysisLinguistic, Cultural, and Literary StudiesCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers

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 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 Hiroshima University tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

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 Kindai 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.