Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Lovely Professional University (India), 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
25,236
co-authored works, 5 years
751
partner universities
74
partner countries
327
sustained deep ties
2.52
collaboration impact (FWCI)
91%
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 #87 in the world for connected research, with Materials Science #176, Energy #291 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and diversity. Lovely Professional University sits in the 49th percentile for impact and the 46th for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 49 of 54 partners (91%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 14th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #652 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (India and SA) carry about 65% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-181 globally in Life Sciences. Route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-218 globally in Life Sciences. Route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health).
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. King Khalid 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.

253
h-index of the joint research base
0.8M
citations to co-authored work
2.52
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
25,236
co-authored works, 2021-2025
50
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.

Influence14th pctReach20th pctDiversity46th pctSustained16th pctImpact49th pctInternational38th pctBrokerage85th pct

Lovely Professional University is strongest on impact (49th percentile), diversity (46th) and international (38th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 49 of 54 partners (91%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (14th 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% weight14th pct+3.1
Impact18% weight49th pct+8.8
Sustained18% weight16th pct+2.9
Reach16% weight20th pct+3.2
Diversity16% weight46th pct+7.4
International10% weight38th pct+3.8

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, Toxicoloโ€ฆ87Materials Science176Energy291Nursing319Chemistry437Computer Sci.477
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Lovely Professional University's strongest connected fields are Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #87, Materials Science #176, Energy #291. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #652 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 #652 for connected research
46/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Saveetha University287
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chandigarh University212
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ University of Technolโ€ฆ194
King Saud University87
Prince Sattam Bin Abdโ€ฆ49
Life Sciences
World #221 for connected research
82/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Saveetha University269
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ University of Technolโ€ฆ225
King Saud University202
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chandigarh University201
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ106
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #242 for connected research
80/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Saveetha University948
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chandigarh University734
King Saud University451
Tribhuvan University408
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Saskatcโ€ฆ243
Social Sciences
World #597 for connected research
50/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chandigarh University134
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Saveetha University102
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ SRM Institute of Scieโ€ฆ38
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Saskatcโ€ฆ36
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ32
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 yieldSaveetha UniversitChandigarh UniversUniversity of SaskPrince Sattam Bin
High yieldStandardLow yield

King Khalid University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.7): a consortium waiting to happen. Tribhuvan University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.2: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Saveetha University1,531 4.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chandigarh University1,054 3.0Standard
King Saud University696 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ University of Technology Sydney498 4.2Standard
Tribhuvan University497 1.2Low yield
King Khalid University316 4.7High yield
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Saskatchewan306 1.0Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ SRM Institute of Science and Technology276 3.1Standard
Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University207 5.6High yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Vellore Institute of Technology University207 4.6High 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‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India 4,479
SA 1,908
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 931
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 612
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 608
NP 497
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 469
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 377

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Saveetha University 1,531
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Chandigarh University 1,054
King Saud University 696
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ University of Technology Sydney 498
Tribhuvan University 497
King Khalid University 316
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Saskatchewan 306
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ SRM Institute of Science and Technology 276

The network spans 74 countries and 751 universities, but the top two carry about 65% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (4 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-181 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-218 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-28 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-22 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics.

Funding route: Wellcome Trust international partnerships or the Gates Foundation (global health)

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.

Computer ScienceAgricultural and Biological SciencesHealth ProfessionsMaterials Science

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 Shaanxi Normal UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Dalian Medical UniversityChina
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Loma Linda UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ University of Gdaล„skPoland
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Northern Illinois UniversityUnited States
IoT and Edge/Fog ComputingBlockchain Technology Applications and SecuritySmart Agriculture and AIArtificial Intelligence in HealthcareNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionNanoparticles: synthesis 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 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 King Khalid University tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence gap and the health & medicine 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 Lovely Professional 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.