Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Osaka 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
5,697
co-authored works, 5 years
647
partner universities
57
partner countries
253
sustained deep ties
1.81
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
  • Physics & Astronomy is the standout field. Ranked #491 in the world for connected research, with Medicine #855, Immunology & Microbiology #879 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and international. Osaka City University sits in the 20th percentile for impact and the 16th for international: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 89 of 99 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 6th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,181 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 84% 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 NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-85 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 2.8). 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.

438
h-index of the joint research base
3.7M
citations to co-authored work
1.81
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
5,697
co-authored works, 2021-2025
19
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.

Influence7th pctReach9th pctDiversity6th pctSustained8th pctImpact20th pctInternational16th pctBrokerage45th pct

Osaka City University is strongest on impact (20th percentile), international (16th) and reach (9th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 89 of 99 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (6th 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% weight7th pct+1.5
Impact18% weight20th pct+3.6
Sustained18% weight8th pct+1.4
Reach16% weight9th pct+1.4
Diversity16% weight6th pct+1.0
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#1000Physics & Astronomy491Medicine855Immunology & Microbiol…879Nursing934Neuroscience938Earth & Planetary Scie…950
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Osaka City University's strongest connected fields are Physics & Astronomy #491, Medicine #855, Immunology & Microbiology #879. The portfolio leans on health & medicine; Social Sciences, at world #1,181 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 #733 for connected research
39/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…833
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University213
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tokyo Metropolitan Un…169
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…151
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kindai University146
Life Sciences
World #1012 for connected research
15/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…262
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tokyo Metropolitan Un…87
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…85
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University65
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University39
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1106 for connected research
8/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…361
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…265
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University192
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University178
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tokyo Institute of Te…151
Social Sciences
World #1181 for connected research
1/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osa…41
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tokyo Metropolitan Un…13
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University10
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Hokkaido University9
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tok…8
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 UniversityTokyo MetropolitanHiroshima Universi
High yieldStandardLow yield

Hiroshima University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 2.8): a consortium waiting to happen. Tokyo Metropolitan University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osaka1,266 2.6Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University381 2.6Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tokyo373 2.7Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tokyo Metropolitan University318 1.9Low yield
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University230 2.5Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University213 2.4Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University172 2.3Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University171 2.5Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kobe University162 2.4Standard
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Hokkaido University155 2.1Standard
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 6,176
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 927
πŸ‡°πŸ‡· South Korea 313
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 243
πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ Germany 235
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 203
πŸ‡«πŸ‡· France 173
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 156

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Osaka 1,266
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyoto University 381
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ The University of Tokyo 373
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tokyo Metropolitan University 318
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Tohoku University 230
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nagoya University 213
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Kyushu University 172
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Keio University 171

The network spans 57 countries and 647 universities, but the top two carry about 84% 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.

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‡ΈπŸ‡¬ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-85 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‡Ί Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-43 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.

Osaka City University Hospital
Physics and AstronomySocial SciencesEngineering

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‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Marymount UniversityUnited States
πŸ‡΅πŸ‡± PoznaΕ„ University of TechnologyPoland
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Gifu UniversityJapan
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Nihon UniversityJapan
Universidad AutΓ³noma MetropolitanaMX
Particle physics theoretical and experimental studiesQuantum Chromodynamics and Particle InteractionsLegal and Regulatory AnalysisLinguistic, Cultural, and Literary StudiesMilitary Technology and StrategiesHigh-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 HKU 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 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 Osaka 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.