Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for New Jersey Institute of Technology (United States), 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.

◇ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 North America · 251 universities benchmarked
7,706
co-authored works, 5 years
843
partner universities
67
partner countries
382
sustained deep ties
2.62
collaboration impact (FWCI)
89%
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
  • Computer Science is the standout field. Ranked #321 in the world for connected research, with Engineering #508, Energy #515 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and impact. New Jersey Institute of Technology sits in the 68th percentile for international and the 55th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 97 of 109 partners (89%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 22nd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,157 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (United States and China) carry about 83% 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-150 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. King Abdulaziz University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 7.3). 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.

343
h-index of the joint research base
1.4M
citations to co-authored work
2.62
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
7,706
co-authored works, 2021-2025
47
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.

Influence27th pctReach34th pctDiversity22nd pctSustained23rd pctImpact55th pctInternational68th pctBrokerage33rd pct

New Jersey Institute of Technology is strongest on international (68th percentile), impact (55th) and reach (34th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 97 of 109 partners (89%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (22nd 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% weight27th pct+5.9
Impact18% weight55th pct+9.9
Sustained18% weight23rd pct+4.1
Reach16% weight34th pct+5.4
Diversity16% weight22nd pct+3.5
International10% weight68th pct+6.8

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#1000Computer Sci.321Engineering508Energy515Neuroscience578Physics & Astronomy615Chemical Engineering743
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

New Jersey Institute of Technology's strongest connected fields are Computer Science #321, Engineering #508, Energy #515. The portfolio leans on physical sciences & engineering; Health & Medicine, at world #1,157 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 #1157 for connected research
3/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Rutgers, The State Un…97
🇨🇳 University of Electro…26
🇺🇸 University of Pennsyl…24
🇺🇸 Harvard University22
🇺🇸 New York University14
Life Sciences
World #1103 for connected research
8/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Rutgers, The State Un…107
🇨🇳 University of Electro…67
🇺🇸 New York University28
🇺🇸 University of Pennsyl…27
🇨🇳 Guangzhou Medical Uni…21
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #814 for connected research
32/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Rutgers, The State Un…149
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins Univers…92
King Abdulaziz Univer…90
🇨🇳 Tongji University89
🇺🇸 University of Califor…83
Social Sciences
World #1088 for connected research
9/100
Top collaboration partners
🇺🇸 Rutgers, The State Un…37
🇺🇸 Pennsylvania State Un…16
🇺🇸 Missouri University o…15
🇺🇸 New York University15
🇺🇸 University at Buffalo…13
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 yieldRutgers, The StateUniversity of ElecKing Abdulaziz Uni
High yieldStandardLow yield

King Abdulaziz University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 7.3): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Nebraska–Lincoln, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.3: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇺🇸 Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey325 1.8Standard
🇨🇳 University of Electronic Science and Technology of China126 2.9Standard
King Abdulaziz University100 7.3High yield
🇺🇸 Harvard University90 4.1High yield
🇨🇳 Tongji University80 4.9High yield
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University79 4.8High yield
🇺🇸 New York University73 3.1Standard
🇺🇸 University of California, Berkeley71 2.7Standard
🇨🇳 Beihang University65 4.9High yield
🇺🇸 University of Michigan63 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

🇺🇸 United States 3,626
🇨🇳 China 1,496
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 226
🇨🇦 Canada 219
🇫🇷 France 202
SA 167
🇩🇪 Germany 119
🇰🇷 South Korea 116

Anchor partner institutions

🇺🇸 Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 325
🇨🇳 University of Electronic Science and Technology of China 126
King Abdulaziz University 100
🇺🇸 Harvard University 90
🇨🇳 Tongji University 80
🇺🇸 Johns Hopkins University 79
🇺🇸 New York University 73
🇺🇸 University of California, Berkeley 71

The network spans 67 countries and 843 universities, but the top two carry about 83% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (11 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.

🇸🇬 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

🇭🇰 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

🇬🇧 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

🇬🇧 University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-97 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

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.

Materials Science in Extreme Environments University Research Alliance
Physics and AstronomyComputer ScienceNeuroscience

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.

🇺🇸 University of Missouri–Kansas CityUnited States
University of Technology MalaysiaMY
🇺🇸 The University of Texas Medical Branch at GalvestonUnited States
🇺🇸 University of DenverUnited States
🇨🇳 University of Shanghai for Science and TechnologyChina
Solar and Space Plasma DynamicsIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsPetri Nets in System ModelingAstro and Planetary ScienceNeural dynamics and brain functionCooperative Communication and Network Coding

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

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity 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 New Jersey Institute of 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 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.