Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Princeton University (United States), a Gold-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— Gold standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
42,720
co-authored works, 5 years
1,062
partner universities
76
partner countries
836
sustained deep ties
5.71
collaboration impact (FWCI)
92%
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 #16 in the world for connected research, with Mathematics #27, Earth & Planetary Sciences #52 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and influence. Princeton University sits in the 100th percentile for impact and the 87th for influence: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 247 of 269 partners (92%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 57th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #899 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 United Kingdom) carry about 72% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-127 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • 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.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Stanford University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 12.0). 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.

1,543
h-index of the joint research base
26.9M
citations to co-authored work
5.71
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
42,720
co-authored works, 2021-2025
77
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.

Influence87th pctReach74th pctDiversity57th pctSustained81st pctImpact100th pctInternational77th pctBrokerage63rd pct

Princeton University is strongest on impact (100th percentile), influence (87th) and sustained (81st). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 247 of 269 partners (92%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (57th 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 Gold band worldwide.
Influence22% weight87th pct+19.1
Impact18% weight100th pct+18.0
Sustained18% weight81st pct+14.6
Reach16% weight74th pct+11.8
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight77th pct+7.7

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 & Astronomy16Mathematics27Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ52Chemical Engineering61Environmental Sci.70Computer Sci.71
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Princeton University's strongest connected fields are Physics & Astronomy #16, Mathematics #27, Earth & Planetary Sciences #52. The portfolio leans on physical sciences & engineering; Health & Medicine, at world #899 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 #899 for connected research
25/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Rutgers, The State Unโ€ฆ176
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University127
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Pennsylโ€ฆ118
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University102
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ90
Life Sciences
World #510 for connected research
57/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University304
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University235
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University229
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University197
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ MIT197
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #255 for connected research
79/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Caltech1,578
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ MIT1,450
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University1,231
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University1,098
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ1,064
Social Sciences
World #268 for connected research
78/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University331
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ New York University317
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago282
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University271
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University242
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 yieldHarvard UniversityStanford UniversitRutgers, The State
High yieldStandardLow yield

Stanford University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 12.0): a consortium waiting to happen. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 4.6: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University1,515 7.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University1,306 12.0High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Massachusetts Institute of Technology1,172 6.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Berkeley1,144 7.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ California Institute of Technology1,095 7.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago989 6.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University916 8.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Center for Astrophysics Harvard & Smithsonian808 5.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey804 4.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Sorbonne Universitรฉ793 8.4Standard
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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 35,192
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 5,823
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 4,126
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 3,727
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 2,541
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 2,137
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 2,106
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Switzerland 1,608

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 1,515
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University 1,306
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1,172
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Berkeley 1,144
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ California Institute of Technology 1,095
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago 989
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Columbia University 916
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Center for Astrophysics Harvard & Smithsonian 808

The network spans 76 countries and 1,062 universities, but the top two carry about 72% 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.

In Physics & Astronomy, the single strongest partnership is ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ California Institute of Technology, with 1206 joint works: the natural anchor for a flagship consortium.
Source: co-authorship by partner-institution country, 2021–2025

Visualisation 5

The research funding behind the network

โ‚ฌ2M54 projects
Horizon EuropeHorizon 2020

€2M across 54 funded projects from the European Commission, split €2M Horizon Europe and €0M Horizon 2020, every project traceable to the funder's own record (CORDIS). The fact file adds the ERC and the major national funders, each named and linked, never a single black-box platform.

Funding is shown next to the network because the two move together: the fundable opportunities below are chosen where a real programme already exists to pay for the bridge.

Source: funders' own award systems + CORDIS, awards active 2021–2025 · verified

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-127 globally in Physical Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in Physics & Astronomy.

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

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 Physics & Astronomy.

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

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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 Physics & Astronomy.

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

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 Physics & Astronomy.

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.

Center for Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer SciencePrinceton Plasma Physics LaboratoryNational Spherical Torus Experiment โ€“ Upgrade
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‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Johannes Gutenberg University MainzGermany
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Charles UniversityCzechia
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Goethe University FrankfurtGermany
๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Hong Kong University of Science and TechnologyHong Kong SAR

Signature joint research

The most-cited work produced with partners, each verifiable.

Magnetic confinement fusion researchGalaxies: Formation, Evolution, PhenomenaStellar, planetary, and galactic studiesParticle physics theoretical and experimental studiesAstronomy and Astrophysical ResearchCosmology and Gravitation Theories

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 Stanford 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.

Subject Award spotlight

Celebrating your significant contributions

We have identified the partnerships below as candidates for the Subject Awards, for a significant contribution to connected research. Each is anchored to a real, cited joint paper, with the lead author taken from that paper's own authorship record.

Physics & Astronomy · candidate
with ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University
★ Lauren Glattly

The Astropy Project: Sustaining and Growing a Community-oriented Open-source Project and the Latest Major Release (v5.0) of the Core Package

2022 · 4,723 citations

Their most-cited joint work, on gamma-ray bursts and supernovae, has been cited 4,723 times and anchors a 869-paper partnership in physics & astronomy.

See the Physics & Astronomy candidates →
These are candidates, not winners. The full slate is undergoing complete review by our editorial team ahead of the awards, and the Subject Awards are exclusive to partner universities.

Your fact file

Claim the full fact file for Princeton 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.