Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Augsburg (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
11,758
co-authored works, 5 years
829
partner universities
65
partner countries
430
sustained deep ties
2.49
collaboration impact (FWCI)
86%
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
  • Psychology is the standout field. Ranked #474 in the world for connected research, with Neuroscience #498, Computer Science #534 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and impact. University of Augsburg sits in the 70th percentile for international and the 47th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 82 of 95 partners (86%) 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.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,138 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 72% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win HKU. World top-1. University of Hong Kong is top-94 globally in Social Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: Horizon Europe (associated-country participation) or bilateral Royal Society / DFG / ANR schemes.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Imperial College London returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.1). 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.

327
h-index of the joint research base
1.2M
citations to co-authored work
2.49
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
11,758
co-authored works, 2021-2025
42
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.

Influence29th pctReach31st pctDiversity18th pctSustained31st pctImpact47th pctInternational70th pctBrokerage14th pct

University of Augsburg is strongest on international (70th percentile), impact (47th) and sustained (31st). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 82 of 95 partners (86%) 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 pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight29th pct+6.4
Impact18% weight47th pct+8.5
Sustained18% weight31st pct+5.6
Reach16% weight31st pct+5.0
Diversity16% weight18th pct+2.9
International10% weight70th pct+7.0

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#1000Psychology474Neuroscience498Computer Sci.534Environmental Sci.543Chemistry547Medicine603
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Augsburg's strongest connected fields are Psychology #474, Neuroscience #498, Computer Science #534. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #1,138 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 #881 for connected research
26/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…432
🇩🇪 Technical University …267
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University226
🇩🇪 Universität Hamburg133
🇩🇪 Heinrich Heine Univer…121
Life Sciences
World #1138 for connected research
5/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…157
🇩🇪 Technical University …96
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University83
🇩🇪 Heinrich Heine Univer…41
🇩🇪 Universität Ulm40
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #966 for connected research
19/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Karlsruhe Institute o…348
🇩🇪 Technical University …194
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…152
🇬🇧 Imperial College Lond…124
🇩🇪 Technische Universitä…99
Social Sciences
World #839 for connected research
30/100
Top collaboration partners
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Un…160
🇬🇧 Imperial College Lond…75
🇩🇪 Technical University …65
🇩🇪 Friedrich-Alexander-U…63
🇩🇪 University of Mannheim47
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 yieldLudwig-MaximiliansTechnical UniversiImperial College LFriedrich-Alexande
High yieldStandardLow yield

Imperial College London returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.1): a consortium waiting to happen. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.4: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München844 3.5Standard
🇩🇪 Technical University of Munich592 4.0Standard
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University355 2.9Standard
🇬🇧 Imperial College London246 4.1Standard
🇩🇪 Karlsruhe Institute of Technology243 2.8Standard
🇩🇪 Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg205 2.4Low yield
🇩🇪 Universität Hamburg200 2.9Standard
🇩🇪 University of Würzburg183 2.7Standard
🇩🇪 Universität Ulm171 2.5Standard
🇩🇪 Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf169 2.6Standard
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 5,931
🇺🇸 United States 1,076
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 896
🇫🇷 France 506
🇮🇹 Italy 393
🇨🇳 China 378
🇦🇹 Austria 324
🇨🇭 Switzerland 295

Anchor partner institutions

🇩🇪 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München 844
🇩🇪 Technical University of Munich 592
🇩🇪 Heidelberg University 355
🇬🇧 Imperial College London 246
🇩🇪 Karlsruhe Institute of Technology 243
🇩🇪 Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg 205
🇩🇪 Universität Hamburg 200
🇩🇪 University of Würzburg 183

The network spans 65 countries and 829 universities, but the top two carry about 72% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the North America white-space (4 of the region's 62 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-94 globally in Social 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

🇸🇬 National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social 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-130 globally in Social 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-52 globally in Social 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.

University Hospital Augsburg
Physics and AstronomyMaterials ScienceSocial Sciences

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 ToledoUnited States
🇨🇳 Chengdu University of TechnologyChina
Tanta UniversityEG
🇨🇳 Donghua UniversityChina
🇨🇦 Polytechnique MontréalCanada
Physics of Superconductivity and MagnetismAdvanced Condensed Matter PhysicsMagnetic and transport properties of perovskites and related materialsQuantum and electron transport phenomenaSociology and Education StudiesRare-earth and actinide compounds

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 North America 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 Imperial College London tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the diversity gap and the life 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 University of Augsburg.

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.