Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Kobe 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
19,345
co-authored works, 5 years
948
partner universities
71
partner countries
548
sustained deep ties
1.82
collaboration impact (FWCI)
87%
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
  • Nursing is the standout field. Ranked #368 in the world for connected research, with Physics & Astronomy #370, Economics, Econometrics & Finance #383 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on reach and sustained. Kobe University sits in the 53rd percentile for reach and the 49th for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 170 of 196 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Impact is the softest pillar. At the 21st percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #811 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 82% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • 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.
  • Win Monash University. World top-7. Monash University is top-43 globally in Health Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Nagoya University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 3.5). 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.

599
h-index of the joint research base
6.9M
citations to co-authored work
1.82
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
19,345
co-authored works, 2021-2025
27
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.

Influence33rd pctReach53rd pctDiversity34th pctSustained49th pctImpact21st pctInternational32nd pctBrokerage19th pct

Kobe University is strongest on reach (53rd percentile), sustained (49th) and diversity (34th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 170 of 196 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Impact (21st 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% weight33rd pct+7.3
Impact18% weight21st pct+3.8
Sustained18% weight49th pct+8.8
Reach16% weight53rd pct+8.5
Diversity16% weight34th pct+5.4
International10% weight32nd pct+3.2

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#1000Nursing368Physics & Astronomy370Economics, Econometricโ€ฆ383Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ537Medicine623Chemical Engineering630
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Kobe University's strongest connected fields are Nursing #368, Physics & Astronomy #370, Economics, Econometrics & Finance #383. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Social Sciences, at world #811 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 #369 for connected research
69/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University596
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ531
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ463
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University333
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kindai University325
Life Sciences
World #512 for connected research
57/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University302
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ260
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ258
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University142
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University120
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #610 for connected research
49/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ941
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University759
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University653
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ640
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University552
Social Sciences
World #811 for connected research
32/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University127
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ98
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ57
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University37
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo Institute of Teโ€ฆ36
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 yieldKyoto UniversityThe University of Nagoya UniversityUniversity of Tsuk
High yieldStandardLow yield

Nagoya University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.5): a consortium waiting to happen. Gifu University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University1,235 3.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo1,197 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka1,017 2.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University644 2.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University607 3.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University561 3.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University499 2.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University489 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kindai University424 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hiroshima University368 2.9Standard
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 14,080
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 1,942
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 895
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 721
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 720
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 431
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 370
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 369

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University 1,235
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo 1,197
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka 1,017
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University 644
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University 607
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University 561
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University 499
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University 489

The network spans 71 countries and 948 universities, but the top two carry about 82% 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‡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‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-43 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 King's College London United Kingdom · world top-10

King's College London is top-46 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‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ The University of Queensland Australia · world top-12

The University of Queensland is top-69 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.

Kobe University HospitalConstruction Engineering Research Institute Foundation
Physics and AstronomyMedicine

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 Silesian University of TechnologyPoland
๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Castilla-La ManchaSpain
๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Universidad de CantabriaSpain
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology DelhiIndia
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Alaska FairbanksUnited States
Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsAstro and Planetary ScienceParticle Detector Development and PerformancePancreatic function and diabetes

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 NUS 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 Nagoya University tie into a consortium concept in Health & Medicine.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the impact 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 Kobe 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.