Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Nevada, Las Vegas (United States), a Silver-band university.  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—‹ Silver standing · Research Collaboration Index
๐ŸŒ North America · 251 universities benchmarked
11,490
co-authored works, 5 years
962
partner universities
76
partner countries
600
sustained deep ties
2.83
collaboration impact (FWCI)
88%
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 #243 in the world for connected research, with Physics & Astronomy #305, Earth & Planetary Sciences #373 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and diversity. University of Nevada, Las Vegas sits in the 66th percentile for impact and the 57th for diversity: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 125 of 143 partners (88%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 42nd percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Life Sciences is the at-risk domain. World #1,023 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (United States and China) carry about 78% 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Win NUS. World top-2. National University of Singapore is top-115 globally in Social Sciences. Route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Harvard University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 9.3). 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.

374
h-index of the joint research base
1.7M
citations to co-authored work
2.83
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
11,490
co-authored works, 2021-2025
52
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.

Influence42nd pctReach56th pctDiversity57th pctSustained56th pctImpact66th pctInternational47th pctBrokerage25th pct

University of Nevada, Las Vegas is strongest on impact (66th percentile), diversity (57th) and sustained (56th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 125 of 143 partners (88%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (42nd 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 Silver band worldwide.
Influence22% weight42nd pct+9.2
Impact18% weight66th pct+11.9
Sustained18% weight56th pct+10.1
Reach16% weight56th pct+9.0
Diversity16% weight57th pct+9.1
International10% weight47th pct+4.7

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#1000Psychology243Physics & Astronomy305Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ373Dentistry450Social Sciences451Health Professions458
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Nevada, Las Vegas's strongest connected fields are Psychology #243, Physics & Astronomy #305, Earth & Planetary Sciences #373. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Life Sciences, at world #1,023 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 #620 for connected research
48/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University102
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ90
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ86
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ81
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ78
Life Sciences
World #1023 for connected research
14/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University38
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ36
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Case Western Reserve โ€ฆ30
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University โ€“ โ€ฆ29
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins Universโ€ฆ28
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #977 for connected research
18/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Caltech140
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ University of Chineseโ€ฆ135
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ MIT111
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ111
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ107
Social Sciences
World #609 for connected research
49/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ110
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ70
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University52
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Emory University49
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of North Cโ€ฆ48
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 NevaHarvard UniversityPennsylvania State
High yieldStandardLow yield

Harvard University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 9.3): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Nevada, Reno, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.1: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada, Reno303 2.1Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University193 9.3High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington179 4.6Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University179 6.6High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Arizona157 3.1Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California San Diego155 5.7Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Southern California132 8.2High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University131 9.4High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Arizona State University127 6.0Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Yale University118 7.3High 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‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 9,286
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 1,348
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 857
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 567
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 524
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 414
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 395
๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 292

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada, Reno 303
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Harvard University 193
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington 179
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Johns Hopkins University 179
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Arizona 157
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California San Diego 155
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Southern California 132
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Pennsylvania State University 131

The network spans 76 countries and 962 universities, but the top two carry about 78% 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.

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ 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: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง University of Edinburgh United Kingdom · world top-9

University of Edinburgh is top-68 globally in Social Sciences. You have no joint publications yet, and it is a natural, fundable bridge in your strongest field.

Funding route: NSF / NIH international collaboration supplements, or a Human Frontier Science Program grant

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 Medical Center of Southern NevadaRocky Mountain Advanced Computing Consortium
Physics and AstronomySocial SciencesEarth and Planetary SciencesMedicine

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.

King Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsSA
๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Massey UniversityNew Zealand
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท Universitรฉ d'AngersFrance
๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น University of AveiroPortugal
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น University of SienaItaly
Gamma-ray bursts and supernovaeLegal Systems and Judicial ProcessesGeological and Geochemical AnalysisAstrophysical Phenomena and ObservationsLegal Cases and CommentaryHigh-pressure geophysics and materials

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 Harvard University tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence 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 Nevada, Las Vegas.

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.