Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Korea University of Science and Technology (South Korea), 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
12,897
co-authored works, 5 years
783
partner universities
68
partner countries
364
sustained deep ties
2.05
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 impact and diversity. Korea University of Science and Technology sits in the 28th percentile for impact and the 25th for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 72 of 80 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Sustained 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 #1,043 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (South Korea and United States) carry about 80% 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 NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-56 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Harvard University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.0). 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.

323
h-index of the joint research base
1.5M
citations to co-authored work
2.05
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
12,897
co-authored works, 2021-2025
29
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.

Influence24th pctReach24th pctDiversity25th pctSustained21st pctImpact28th pctInternational24th pctBrokerage46th pct

Korea University of Science and Technology is strongest on impact (28th percentile), diversity (25th) and influence (24th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 72 of 80 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Sustained (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 pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight24th pct+5.3
Impact18% weight28th pct+5.0
Sustained18% weight21st pct+3.8
Reach16% weight24th pct+3.8
Diversity16% weight25th pct+4.0
International10% weight24th pct+2.4

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 #879 for connected research
26/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Chungnam National Uni…139
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea University126
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Seoul National Univer…122
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Kyung Hee University111
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Yonsei University101
Life Sciences
World #572 for connected research
52/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea University297
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Chungnam National Uni…207
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Seoul National Univer…195
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Sungkyunkwan Universi…195
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Yonsei University150
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #515 for connected research
57/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea University976
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Seoul National Univer…559
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Yonsei University504
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Kyung Hee University464
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea Advanced Instit…432
Social Sciences
World #1043 for connected research
13/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Miami University38
Istanbul University10
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea University9
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Iowa State University7
Kazan Federal Univers…6
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 yieldKorea UniversitySeoul National UniPusan National UniPohang University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harvard University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.0): a consortium waiting to happen. Pusan National University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.6: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea University1,320 2.5Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Seoul National University838 2.4Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Chungnam National University750 2.1Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Yonsei University711 2.3Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Kyung Hee University692 2.2Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Sungkyunkwan University677 2.3Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology563 2.5Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Pusan National University390 1.6Low yield
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Hanyang University349 2.1Standard
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Chungbuk National University287 1.8Standard
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‡· South Korea 9,009
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 2,032
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 767
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Japan 566
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 489
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 387
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· France 340
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 221

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea University 1,320
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Seoul National University 838
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Chungnam National University 750
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Yonsei University 711
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Kyung Hee University 692
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Sungkyunkwan University 677
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology 563
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Pusan National University 390

The network spans 68 countries and 783 universities, but the top two carry about 80% 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.

πŸ‡­πŸ‡° 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

πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡¬ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-56 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‡° 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

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.

EngineeringEnergyBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyPhysics 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.

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Uniformed Services University of the Health SciencesUnited States
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Qingdao University of Science and TechnologyChina
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Chungnam National UniversitySouth Korea
πŸ‡΅πŸ‡± University of ŁódΕΊPoland
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Northeast Agricultural UniversityChina
Advancements in Battery MaterialsElectrocatalysts for Energy ConversionGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesAdvanced Battery Materials and TechnologiesFuel Cells and Related MaterialsStellar, planetary, and galactic studies

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 Harvard University tie into a consortium concept in Physical Sciences & Engineering.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the sustained 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 Korea University of Science and Technology.

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.