Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Kumamoto 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.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
10,976
co-authored works, 5 years
826
partner universities
61
partner countries
375
sustained deep ties
1.72
collaboration impact (FWCI)
84%
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
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics is the standout field. Ranked #356 in the world for connected research, with Immunology & Microbiology #368, Chemistry #602 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and reach. Kumamoto University sits in the 36th percentile for international and the 30th for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 53 of 63 partners (84%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 11th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,165 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 85% 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 CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-132 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 4.2). 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.

524
h-index of the joint research base
4.6M
citations to co-authored work
1.72
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
10,976
co-authored works, 2021-2025
20
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.

Influence23rd pctReach30th pctDiversity11th pctSustained22nd pctImpact18th pctInternational36th pctBrokerage7th pct

Kumamoto University is strongest on international (36th percentile), reach (30th) and influence (23rd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 53 of 63 partners (84%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (11th 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% weight23rd pct+5.1
Impact18% weight18th pct+3.2
Sustained18% weight22nd pct+4.0
Reach16% weight30th pct+4.8
Diversity16% weight11th pct+1.8
International10% weight36th pct+3.6

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#1000Pharmacology, Toxicolo…356Immunology & Microbiol…368Chemistry602Materials Science609Biochem. & Mol. Biology638Neuroscience688
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Kumamoto University's strongest connected fields are Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #356, Immunology & Microbiology #368, Chemistry #602. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Social Sciences, at world #1,165 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 #590 for connected research
51/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University487
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…460
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University444
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University318
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…275
Life Sciences
World #639 for connected research
47/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…272
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University192
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University166
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University139
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…118
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #898 for connected research
25/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University199
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University189
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…169
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University137
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…115
Social Sciences
World #1165 for connected research
2/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University34
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University23
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…18
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Hokkaido University14
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…14
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 Hiroshima UniversiUniversity of Tsuk
High yieldStandardLow yield

Hiroshima University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.2): a consortium waiting to happen. Kagoshima University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University815 2.8Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tokyo778 3.3Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University768 2.2Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University551 2.2Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osaka443 2.8Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Hokkaido University382 3.8Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University343 3.0Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University334 2.9Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Yokohama City University308 2.8Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Chiba University305 3.0Standard
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‡΅ Japan 10,095
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 1,166
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 502
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 363
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 353
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· France 333
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 226
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· South Korea 203

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University 815
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tokyo 778
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University 768
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University 551
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osaka 443
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Hokkaido University 382
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University 343
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University 334

The network spans 61 countries and 826 universities, but the top two carry about 85% 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.

πŸ‡­πŸ‡° 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

πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-132 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-110 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.

Kumamoto City HospitalKumamoto University HospitalKumamoto Chuo Hospital
Immunology and MicrobiologyBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyMedicine

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.

Universitas Gadjah MadaID
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· UniversitΓ© Paris 8France
Ferdowsi University of MashhadIR
Kaohsiung Medical UniversityTW
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· Ajou UniversitySouth Korea
Immune Cell Function and InteractionHIV Research and TreatmentAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesHepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and PrognosisImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesT-cell and B-cell Immunology

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 diversity 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 Kumamoto 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.