Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Universität Greifswald (Germany), 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
🌍 Europe · 417 universities benchmarked
8,316
co-authored works, 5 years
827
partner universities
69
partner countries
396
sustained deep ties
2.69
collaboration impact (FWCI)
87%
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
  • Dentistry is the standout field. Ranked #312 in the world for connected research, with Psychology #386, Earth & Planetary Sciences #399 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and impact. Universität Greifswald sits in the 75th percentile for international and the 59th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 95 of 109 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 12th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Physical Sciences & Engineering is the at-risk domain. World #1,100 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Germany and United States) carry about 70% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-181 globally in Life Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Win CUHK. World top-3. Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-218 globally in Life Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Technical University of Munich returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.4). 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.

490
h-index of the joint research base
2.2M
citations to co-authored work
2.69
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
8,316
co-authored works, 2021-2025
50
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.

Influence12th pctReach30th pctDiversity28th pctSustained25th pctImpact59th pctInternational75th pctBrokerage19th pct

Universität Greifswald is strongest on international (75th percentile), impact (59th) and reach (30th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 95 of 109 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (12th 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% weight12th pct+2.6
Impact18% weight59th pct+10.6
Sustained18% weight25th pct+4.5
Reach16% weight30th pct+4.8
Diversity16% weight28th pct+4.5
International10% weight75th pct+7.5

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#1000Dentistry312Psychology386Earth & Planetary Scie…399Environmental Sci.416Biochem. & Mol. Biology496Neuroscience566
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Universität Greifswald's strongest connected fields are Dentistry #312, Psychology #386, Earth & Planetary Sciences #399. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Physical Sciences & Engineering, at world #1,100 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 #995 for connected research
17/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…101
🇩🇪 Universität Hamburg82
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University75
🇩🇪 Medizinische Hochschu…59
🇩🇪 Heinrich Heine Univer…53
Life Sciences
World #944 for connected research
21/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…89
🇩🇪 Christian-Albrechts-U…66
🇺🇸 Harvard University61
🇩🇪 University of Regensb…59
🇩🇪 Technical University …58
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #1100 for connected research
8/100
Top collaboration partners
🇳🇴 University of Oslo1,150
🇺🇸 Iowa State University1,146
🇩🇪 University of Rostock203
🇩🇪 University of Bremen71
🇩🇪 Humboldt-Universität …71
Social Sciences
World #1066 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Philipps University o…55
🇩🇪 Humboldt-Universität …43
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…40
🇩🇪 Leipzig University35
🇩🇪 Technische Universitä…29
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 yieldUniversity of RostLudwig-MaximiliansTechnical Universi
High yieldStandardLow yield

Technical University of Munich returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.4): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Rostock, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇩🇪 University of Rostock250 2.4Low yield
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München208 3.0Low yield
🇩🇪 Universität Hamburg178 3.5Standard
🇩🇪 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin134 3.7Standard
🇩🇪 Leipzig University127 3.1Low yield
🇩🇪 Philipps University of Marburg114 2.5Low yield
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University113 5.0Standard
🇩🇪 Technical University of Munich109 5.4Standard
🇩🇪 Technische Universität Dresden105 4.0Standard
🇩🇪 Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel103 2.6Low 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

🇩🇪 Germany 3,524
🇺🇸 United States 1,040
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 522
🇫🇷 France 424
🇦🇹 Austria 270
🇳🇱 Netherlands 269
🇸🇪 Sweden 232
🇨🇦 Canada 229

Anchor partner institutions

🇩🇪 University of Rostock 250
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München 208
🇩🇪 Universität Hamburg 178
🇩🇪 Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin 134
🇩🇪 Leipzig University 127
🇩🇪 Philipps University of Marburg 114
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University 113
🇩🇪 Technical University of Munich 109

The network spans 69 countries and 827 universities, but the top two carry about 70% 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.

🇭🇰 University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-1

University of Hong Kong is top-181 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

🇭🇰 Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong SAR · world top-3

Chinese University of Hong Kong is top-218 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

🇦🇺 Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-121 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

🇸🇬 Nanyang Technological University Singapore · world top-14

Nanyang Technological University is top-439 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes

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.

Universitätsmedizin GreifswaldStiftung Alfried Krupp Kolleg GreifswaldInstitut für Klimaschutz, Energie und Mobilität
Environmental ScienceEarth and Planetary SciencesBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular BiologyEngineering

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.

🇯🇵 Chiba UniversityJapan
🇺🇸 American UniversityUnited States
🇹🇭 Prince of Songkla UniversityThailand
🇵🇱 Medical University of WarsawPoland
🇺🇸 Lehigh UniversityUnited States
Methane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaEarthquake Detection and AnalysisSeismic Waves and AnalysisEnzyme Catalysis and ImmobilizationGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesPlasma Diagnostics and Applications

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 Technical University of Munich tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence gap and the physical sciences & engineering 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 Universität Greifswald.

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.