Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Nagoya University (Japan), a Silver-band university.  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—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
36,967
co-authored works, 5 years
1,091
partner universities
77
partner countries
817
sustained deep ties
2.84
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
  • Materials Science is the standout field. Ranked #109 in the world for connected research, with Physics & Astronomy #134, Energy #141 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on reach and sustained. Nagoya University sits in the 80th percentile for reach and the 78th for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 205 of 227 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 41st percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #802 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 75% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • 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.
  • Win Monash University. World top-7. Monash University is top-215 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Kobe 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.

745
h-index of the joint research base
14.9M
citations to co-authored work
2.84
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
36,967
co-authored works, 2021-2025
60
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.

Influence60th pctReach80th pctDiversity64th pctSustained78th pctImpact67th pctInternational41st pctBrokerage80th pct

Nagoya University is strongest on reach (80th percentile), sustained (78th) and impact (67th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 205 of 227 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (41st 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveEach block is a pillarโ€™s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight60th pct+13.2
Impact18% weight67th pct+12.1
Sustained18% weight78th pct+14.0
Reach16% weight80th pct+12.8
Diversity16% weight64th pct+10.2
International10% weight41st pct+4.1

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#1000Materials Science109Physics & Astronomy134Energy141Chemical Engineering289Agricultural & Biologiโ€ฆ306Chemistry321
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Nagoya University's strongest connected fields are Materials Science #109, Physics & Astronomy #134, Energy #141. The portfolio leans on physical sciences & engineering; Social Sciences, at world #802 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 #260 for connected research
78/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University732
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ651
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya City University618
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ578
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University530
Life Sciences
World #265 for connected research
78/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ597
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University508
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ335
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya City University271
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University253
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #210 for connected research
82/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ2,665
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University1,868
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ1,420
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University1,175
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University1,065
Social Sciences
World #802 for connected research
33/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ124
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University84
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ62
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University55
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya City University50
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 yieldThe University of Kyoto UniversityNagoya City UniverKobe University
High yieldStandardLow yield

Kobe University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.5): a consortium waiting to happen. Kyoto University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.5: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo3,031 2.9Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University2,353 2.5Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka1,744 2.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University1,642 2.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University1,279 2.6Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University1,030 2.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya City University973 1.9Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University904 2.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hiroshima University815 3.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต University of Tsukuba715 2.7Low 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‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 27,223
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 6,785
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 2,581
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 2,043
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 2,021
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 1,666
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 1,510
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 1,310

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo 3,031
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University 2,353
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka 1,744
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University 1,642
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University 1,279
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University 1,030
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya City University 973
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University 904

The network spans 77 countries and 1,091 universities, but the top two carry about 75% 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-56 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Materials Science.

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-215 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Materials Science.

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-581 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Materials Science.

Funding route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Imperial College London United Kingdom · world top-13

Imperial College London is top-59 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Materials Science.

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 University HospitalMAGIC Telescopes
Physics 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.

๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ University of South AustraliaAustralia
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ George Mason UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Georgetown UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง Manchester Metropolitan UniversityUnited Kingdom
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ The University of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonUnited States
Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsSolar and Space Plasma DynamicsPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsHigh-Energy Particle Collisions 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 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 Kobe University tie into a consortium concept in Physical Sciences & Engineering.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international 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 Nagoya 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.