Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Calcutta (India), 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 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
11,190
co-authored works, 5 years
647
partner universities
65
partner countries
198
sustained deep ties
1.38
collaboration impact (FWCI)
91%
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
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics is the standout field. Ranked #727 in the world for connected research, with Chemical Engineering #748, Energy #825 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on diversity and impact. University of Calcutta sits in the 18th percentile for diversity and the 11th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 45 of 49 partners (91%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 4th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Social Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #863 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (India and United States) carry about 64% 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-96 globally in Life Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. UNSW Sydney 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.

231
h-index of the joint research base
1.1M
citations to co-authored work
1.38
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
11,190
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.

Influence4th pctReach9th pctDiversity18th pctSustained5th pctImpact11th pctInternational8th pctBrokerage59th pct

University of Calcutta is strongest on diversity (18th percentile), impact (11th) and reach (9th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 45 of 49 partners (91%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (4th 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% weight4th pct+0.9
Impact18% weight11th pct+2.0
Sustained18% weight5th pct+0.9
Reach16% weight9th pct+1.4
Diversity16% weight18th pct+2.9
International10% weight8th pct+0.8

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#1000Pharmacology, Toxicoloโ€ฆ727Chemical Engineering748Energy825Chemistry856Nursing881Mathematics903
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Calcutta's strongest connected fields are Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #727, Chemical Engineering #748, Energy #825. The portfolio leans on life sciences; Social Sciences, at world #863 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 #859 for connected research
28/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur University45
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi28
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ22
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ All India Institute oโ€ฆ17
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University14
Life Sciences
World #519 for connected research
57/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur University52
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi24
๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฆ University of Johanneโ€ฆ21
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ21
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ17
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #615 for connected research
49/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur University432
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ127
King Saud University68
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ54
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ40
Social Sciences
World #863 for connected research
28/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi18
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur University16
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu Universโ€ฆ12
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Tโ€ฆ10
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Ruhr University Bochum10
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 yieldJadavpur UniversitIndian Institute oUniversity of DelhAnna University, C
High yieldStandardLow yield

UNSW Sydney returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.4): a consortium waiting to happen. Jadavpur University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.8: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur University418 1.8Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur136 2.0Standard
King Saud University86 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu University80 1.7Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi55 3.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Vellore Institute of Technology University45 1.9Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Bombay43 2.0Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Science Bangalore34 2.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Delhi33 1.4Low yield
King Khalid University33 3.5Standard
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‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India 1,172
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 423
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 223
SA 212
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 117
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 116
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 112
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 109

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur University 418
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur 136
King Saud University 86
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Banaras Hindu University 80
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Delhi 55
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Vellore Institute of Technology University 45
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Technology Bombay 43
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Indian Institute of Science Bangalore 34

The network spans 65 countries and 647 universities, but the top two carry about 64% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the North America white-space (3 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.

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ National University of Singapore Singapore · world top-2

National University of Singapore is top-96 globally in Life 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

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Oxford United Kingdom · world top-4

University of Oxford is top-28 globally in Life Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: the Human Frontier Science Program or a Belmont Forum collaborative-research action

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.

Indian Institute of Chemical BiologyIndian Institute of Social Welfare and Business ManagementR. G. Kar Medical College and HospitalBankim Sardar CollegeGovernment College of Art & CraftJogesh Chandra Chaudhuri CollegeNetaji Nagar Day CollegeMaharaja Manindra Chandra College
MedicinePhysics and AstronomyMaterials ScienceEngineering

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‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kagoshima UniversityJapan
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Toho UniversityJapan
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto Prefectural University of MedicineJapan
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Jadavpur UniversityIndia
Bandung Institute of TechnologyID
Metal complexes synthesis and propertiesSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesMagnetism in coordination complexesAdvancements in Semiconductor Devices and Circuit DesignPhotonic and Optical DevicesSemiconductor materials and devices

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 UNSW Sydney tie into a consortium concept in Life Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence 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 University of Calcutta.

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.