Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Nagoya City 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
7,090
co-authored works, 5 years
641
partner universities
61
partner countries
263
sustained deep ties
1.68
collaboration impact (FWCI)
83%
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
  • Immunology & Microbiology is the standout field. Ranked #422 in the world for connected research, with Neuroscience #551, Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #694 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. Nagoya City University sits in the 17th percentile for impact and the 16th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 49 of 59 partners (83%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Sustained is the softest pillar. At the 8th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,164 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 88% 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. Hokkaido University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 2.6). 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.

344
h-index of the joint research base
2.1M
citations to co-authored work
1.68
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
7,090
co-authored works, 2021-2025
13
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.

Influence11th pctReach9th pctDiversity11th pctSustained8th pctImpact17th pctInternational16th pctBrokerage4th pct

Nagoya City University is strongest on impact (17th percentile), international (16th) and influence (11th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 49 of 59 partners (83%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Sustained (8th 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% weight11th pct+2.4
Impact18% weight17th pct+3.1
Sustained18% weight8th pct+1.4
Reach16% weight9th pct+1.4
Diversity16% weight11th pct+1.8
International10% weight16th pct+1.6

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#1000Immunology & Microbiol…422Neuroscience551Pharmacology, Toxicolo…694Medicine699Biochem. & Mol. Biology879Nursing888
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Nagoya City University's strongest connected fields are Immunology & Microbiology #422, Neuroscience #551, Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #694. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #1,164 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 #572 for connected research
52/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University618
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…396
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University324
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University304
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University287
Life Sciences
World #881 for connected research
26/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University271
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…143
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University116
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…114
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University76
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1164 for connected research
3/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University96
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University53
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University53
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Hokkaido University34
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…33
Social Sciences
World #1158 for connected research
3/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University50
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University49
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…26
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University23
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Chiba University18
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 yieldNagoya UniversityThe University of Hokkaido Universit
High yieldStandardLow yield

Hokkaido University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 2.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Nagoya University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University973 1.9Low yield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osaka509 2.0Low yield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University492 2.1Low yield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tokyo404 2.5Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University398 2.4Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University348 2.5Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Chiba University300 2.1Low yield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University287 2.5Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Yokohama City University264 2.3Low yield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ University of Tsukuba261 2.2Low 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

πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Japan 9,021
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 938
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 383
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 247
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· South Korea 196
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· France 194
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 179
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 151

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University 973
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osaka 509
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University 492
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tokyo 404
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University 398
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University 348
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Chiba University 300
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University 287

The network spans 61 countries and 641 universities, but the top two carry about 88% 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 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

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.

Nagoya City University Hospital
MedicineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyNeuroscience

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‡§πŸ‡· Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de JaneiroBrazil
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Louisiana State University Agricultural CenterUnited States
Novosibirsk State UniversityRU
SelΓ§uk UniversityTR
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Yamagata UniversityJapan
Hepatitis C virus researchHepatitis B Virus StudiesGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchIon channel regulation and functionLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

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

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the sustained gap and the physical sciences & engineering 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 Nagoya City 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.