Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Mataram (ID), 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
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
24,016
co-authored works, 5 years
347
partner universities
58
partner countries
86
sustained deep ties
0.72
collaboration impact (FWCI)
90%
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 #843 in the world for connected research, with Nursing #955, Mathematics #979 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on diversity and sustained. University of Mataram sits in the 7th percentile for diversity and the 2nd for sustained: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 65 of 73 partners (90%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • International is the softest pillar. At the 0th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #663 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (ID and MY) carry about 83% 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Yogyakarta State University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 2.5). 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.

112
h-index of the joint research base
0.2M
citations to co-authored work
0.72
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
24,016
co-authored works, 2021-2025
9
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.

Influence1st pctReach2nd pctDiversity7th pctSustained2nd pctImpact1st pctInternational0th pctBrokerage43rd pct

University of Mataram is strongest on diversity (7th percentile), sustained (2nd) and reach (2nd). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 65 of 73 partners (90%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is International (0th 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.

InflImpaSustReacDiveEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight1st pct+0.2
Impact18% weight1st pct+0.2
Sustained18% weight2nd pct+0.4
Reach16% weight2nd pct+0.3
Diversity16% weight7th pct+1.1
International10% weight0th pct+0.0

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#1000Pharmacology, Toxicolo…843Nursing955Mathematics979Social Sciences1023Energy1023Immunology & Microbiol…1035
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Mataram's strongest connected fields are Pharmacology, Toxicology & Pharmaceutics #843, Nursing #955, Mathematics #979. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #663 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 #663 for connected research
45/100
Top collaboration partners
Airlangga University60
Universitas Gadjah Ma…40
Hasanuddin University37
University of Indones…32
Udayana University27
Life Sciences
World #171 for connected research
86/100
Top collaboration partners
Airlangga University61
Universitas Gadjah Ma…48
Hasanuddin University42
University of Brawija…34
Udayana University33
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #400 for connected research
67/100
Top collaboration partners
University of Brawija…66
Bandung Institute of …44
Universiti Putra Mala…29
Universitas Gadjah Ma…29
State University of M…25
Social Sciences
World #21 for connected research
98/100
Top collaboration partners
Institut Agama Islam …71
Universitas Islam Neg…59
Universitas Patria Ar…51
Indonesia University …48
State University of M…45
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 yieldAirlangga UniversiUniversity of BrawUniversitas Islam Sebelas Maret Univ
High yieldStandardLow yield

Yogyakarta State University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 2.5): a consortium waiting to happen. Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 0.9: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
Airlangga University157 1.9Standard
University of Brawijaya142 1.2Standard
Universitas Gadjah Mada132 1.4Standard
Hasanuddin University111 1.3Standard
Udayana University96 1.2Standard
State University of Malang86 1.9Standard
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Bengkulu85 1.6Standard
Indonesia University of Education76 1.2Standard
Universitas Islam Negeri Sumatera Utara75 0.9Low yield
Universitas Patria Artha68 1.6Standard
Source: institution-to-institution co-authorship ledger + field-weighted citation impact

Visualisation 4

Your global reach, and where it thins out

Top partner countries

ID 1,846
MY 162
🇦🇺 Australia 110
🇺🇸 United States 81
🇬🇧 United Kingdom 79
🇰🇷 South Korea 57
🇯🇵 Japan 56
🇹🇭 Thailand 34

Anchor partner institutions

Airlangga University 157
University of Brawijaya 142
Universitas Gadjah Mada 132
Hasanuddin University 111
Udayana University 96
State University of Malang 86
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Bengkulu 85
Indonesia University of Education 76

The network spans 58 countries and 347 universities, but the top two carry about 83% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (10 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.

🇭🇰 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

🇸🇬 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

🇭🇰 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: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program

🇬🇧 University of Cambridge United Kingdom · world top-6

University of Cambridge is top-35 globally in Social 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.

Social SciencesComputer Science

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.

Sepuluh Nopember Institute of TechnologyID
Andalas UniversityID
State University of PadangID
Universitas Negeri SurabayaID
Telkom UniversityID
STEM EducationEducational Methods and Media UseEducational Methods and OutcomesEducational Curriculum and Learning MethodsSMEs Development and Digital MarketingEducation and Character Development

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 Yogyakarta State University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the international 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 Mataram.

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.