Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for University of Nevada, Reno (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
13,276
co-authored works, 5 years
986
partner universities
74
partner countries
610
sustained deep ties
2.85
collaboration impact (FWCI)
85%
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
  • Arts & Humanities is the standout field. Ranked #169 in the world for connected research, with Earth & Planetary Sciences #316, Nursing #326 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on impact and reach. University of Nevada, Reno sits in the 67th percentile for impact and the 60th for reach: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 102 of 121 partners (85%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Influence is the softest pillar. At the 45th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #832 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. University of Michigan returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 5.6). 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.

511
h-index of the joint research base
3.1M
citations to co-authored work
2.85
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
13,276
co-authored works, 2021-2025
47
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.

Influence45th pctReach60th pctDiversity46th pctSustained58th pctImpact67th pctInternational47th pctBrokerage10th pct

University of Nevada, Reno is strongest on impact (67th percentile), reach (60th) and sustained (58th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 102 of 121 partners (85%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Influence (45th 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% weight45th pct+9.9
Impact18% weight67th pct+12.1
Sustained18% weight58th pct+10.4
Reach16% weight60th pct+9.6
Diversity16% weight46th pct+7.4
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#1000Arts & Humanities169Earth & Planetary Scieโ€ฆ316Nursing326Environmental Sci.352Social Sciences502Physics & Astronomy518
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

University of Nevada, Reno's strongest connected fields are Arts & Humanities #169, Earth & Planetary Sciences #316, Nursing #326. The portfolio leans on social sciences; Health & Medicine, at world #832 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 #832 for connected research
30/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University113
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University102
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Baylor College of Medโ€ฆ82
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ81
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah76
Life Sciences
World #826 for connected research
31/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ72
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washingโ€ฆ43
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah40
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University38
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Florida38
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #760 for connected research
36/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Coloradโ€ฆ140
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah119
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Califorโ€ฆ118
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ107
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Caltech102
Social Sciences
World #731 for connected research
39/100
Top collaboration partners
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada,โ€ฆ110
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University44
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah43
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Illinoiโ€ฆ40
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University37
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 NevaUniversity of UtahUniversity of Cali
High yieldStandardLow yield

University of Michigan returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 5.6): a consortium waiting to happen. University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 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, Las Vegas303 2.1Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah238 2.4Low yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Davis198 4.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University181 3.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University170 5.5Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University161 4.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan155 5.6High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington155 4.3Standard
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Berkeley153 7.5High yield
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Florida146 3.2Standard
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 9,831
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 852
๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 822
๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 647
๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 475
๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 446
๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 430
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 277

Anchor partner institutions

๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Nevada, Las Vegas 303
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Utah 238
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of California, Davis 198
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Cornell University 181
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Stanford University 170
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ Indiana University 161
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Michigan 155
๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ University of Washington 155

The network spans 74 countries and 986 universities, but the top two carry about 78% 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-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‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ 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: 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.

Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology
Earth and Planetary SciencesPhysics and AstronomyEnvironmental 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.

๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ Shanghai UniversityChina
China Medical UniversityTW
๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli"Italy
Islamic Azad University, TehranIR
King Fahd University of Petroleum and MineralsSA
earthquake and tectonic studiesGeological and Geochemical AnalysisLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesAtomic and Molecular PhysicsRangeland and Wildlife Management

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 Michigan tie into a consortium concept in Social Sciences.

60-90 days
Interrogate the soft spots

Address the influence 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 Nevada, Reno.

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.