Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (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.

โ—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
9,838
co-authored works, 5 years
846
partner universities
65
partner countries
413
sustained deep ties
2.02
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
  • Materials Science is the standout field. Ranked #469 in the world for connected research, with Energy #568, Computer Science #582 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and reach. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute sits in the 47th percentile for international and the 34th for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 109 of 122 partners (89%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 18th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,130 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 82% 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. Dartmouth College returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.1). 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.

576
h-index of the joint research base
4.1M
citations to co-authored work
2.02
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
9,838
co-authored works, 2021-2025
33
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 pctDiversity18th pctSustained28th pctImpact27th pctInternational47th pctBrokerage39th pct

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is strongest on international (47th percentile), reach (34th) and sustained (28th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 109 of 122 partners (89%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (18th 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 global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight27th pct+5.9
Impact18% weight27th pct+4.9
Sustained18% weight28th pct+5.0
Reach16% weight34th pct+5.4
Diversity16% weight18th pct+2.9
International10% weight47th pct+4.7

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#1000Materials Science469Energy568Computer Sci.582Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ620Engineering636Physics & Astronomy652
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute's strongest connected fields are Materials Science #469, Energy #568, Computer Science #582. The portfolio leans on physical sciences & engineering; Health & Medicine, at world #1,130 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 #1130 for connected research
5/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University at Buffaloโ€ฆ34
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Icahn School of Medicโ€ฆ26
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University24
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University24
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University20
Life Sciences
World #1080 for connected research
10/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University35
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Rutgers, The State Unโ€ฆ29
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ24
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Binghamton University20
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University20
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #790 for connected research
34/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Dartmouth College2,419
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Massachโ€ฆ1,008
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago87
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan85
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ MIT84
Social Sciences
World #1069 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Marylanโ€ฆ24
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Purdue University Wesโ€ฆ21
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Universitรฉ Paris-Saclโ€ฆ18
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Binghamton University15
๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Hong Kong Polytechnicโ€ฆ15
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 yieldDartmouth CollegeCornell UniversityUniversity at Buff
High yieldStandardLow yield

Dartmouth College returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.1): a consortium waiting to happen. University at Buffalo, State University of New York, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Dartmouth College302 5.1High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University97 5.2High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University at Buffalo, State University of New York96 1.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago93 3.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan93 4.8High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Purdue University West Lafayette92 3.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University91 3.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University88 4.4High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Massachusetts Institute of Technology82 4.9High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Arizona State University78 2.2Standard
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 5,023
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 839
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 310
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 267
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 229
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 179
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 164
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 131

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Dartmouth College 302
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University 97
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University at Buffalo, State University of New York 96
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Chicago 93
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan 93
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Purdue University West Lafayette 92
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University 91
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 88

The network spans 65 countries and 846 universities, but the top two carry about 82% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Africa 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‡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 your strongest field.

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 your strongest field.

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 your strongest field.

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

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University College London United Kingdom · world top-5

University College London is top-93 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.

Earth and Planetary SciencesEnvironmental SciencePhysics and AstronomyEngineering

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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Northern Illinois UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Nanjing University of Chinese MedicineChina
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ East Carolina UniversityUnited States
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ท Universidade do Estado do Rio de JaneiroBrazil
University of MariborSI
Seismic Waves and AnalysisMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaEarthquake Detection and AnalysisIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsSemiconductor materials and devicesGeophysics and Gravity Measurements

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 Africa 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 Dartmouth College 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 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

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.