Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Electro-Communications (Japan), 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
5,952
co-authored works, 5 years
571
partner universities
55
partner countries
207
sustained deep ties
1.33
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
  • Energy is the standout field. Ranked #536 in the world for connected research, with Computer Science #657, Physics & Astronomy #719 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on international and impact. University of Electro-Communications sits in the 38th percentile for international and the 10th for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 75 of 82 partners (91%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 4th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,176 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (Japan and China) carry about 77% 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-56 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. University of Science and Technology of China returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 4.0). 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.

264
h-index of the joint research base
0.9M
citations to co-authored work
1.33
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
5,952
co-authored works, 2021-2025
25
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.

Influence8th pctReach5th pctDiversity4th pctSustained5th pctImpact10th pctInternational38th pctBrokerage60th pct

University of Electro-Communications is strongest on international (38th percentile), impact (10th) and influence (8th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 75 of 82 partners (91%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (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% weight8th pct+1.8
Impact18% weight10th pct+1.8
Sustained18% weight5th pct+0.9
Reach16% weight5th pct+0.8
Diversity16% weight4th pct+0.6
International10% weight38th pct+3.8

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#1000Energy536Computer Sci.657Physics & Astronomy719Engineering851Chemistry1023Materials Science1030
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Electro-Communications's strongest connected fields are Energy #536, Computer Science #657, Physics & Astronomy #719. The portfolio leans on physical sciences & engineering; Health & Medicine, at world #1,176 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 #1176 for connected research
2/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Kansas State Universiโ€ฆ21
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ17
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo Metropolitan Unโ€ฆ16
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University9
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nihon University8
Life Sciences
World #1159 for connected research
3/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ25
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo Institute of Teโ€ฆ17
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University17
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ15
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Hokkaido University11
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #735 for connected research
38/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ302
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University171
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ165
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University142
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University137
Social Sciences
World #1163 for connected research
3/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokโ€ฆ21
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University17
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University15
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University12
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaโ€ฆ12
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 yieldThe University of Nagoya UniversityTokyo University oBeijing Institute
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Science and Technology of China returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 4.0): a consortium waiting to happen. Tokyo University of Science, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 1.0: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo317 2.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University173 1.4Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka169 1.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University134 2.2Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University133 1.8Standard
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo University of Science110 1.0Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University98 1.2Low yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University94 2.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Science and Technology of China68 4.0High yield
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo Institute of Technology66 3.4High 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

๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 2,197
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 917
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 450
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 137
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 132
MX 76
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 71
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 70

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Tokyo 317
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Nagoya University 173
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต The University of Osaka 169
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyoto University 134
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tohoku University 133
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Tokyo University of Science 110
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Keio University 98
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kyushu University 94

The network spans 55 countries and 571 universities, but the top two carry about 77% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (9 of the region's 100 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: 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-56 globally in Physical 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-84 globally in Physical 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 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

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.

Physics and AstronomyEarth and Planetary SciencesEngineeringNeuroscience

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.

Universidad Autรณnoma MetropolitanaMX
๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Kitasato UniversityJapan
๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ท Universidade Federal de Mato GrossoBrazil
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ Anna University, ChennaiIndia
Universidad Catรณlica Santo DomingoDO
Advanced Fiber Laser TechnologiesEarthquake Detection and AnalysisPhotonic and Optical DevicesTactile and Sensory InteractionsIonosphere and magnetosphere dynamicsSolid State Laser Technologies

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 Europe 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 University of Science and Technology of China 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 University of Electro-Communications.

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.