Global Research PartnershipsCreate free account
Research Collaboration Index
A worked example using real, public data for Zhejiang Sci-Tech University (China), 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.

β—‡ Ranked in the Research Collaboration Index
🌍 Asia-Pacific · 391 universities benchmarked
15,148
co-authored works, 5 years
660
partner universities
57
partner countries
326
sustained deep ties
2.38
collaboration impact (FWCI)
87%
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 #270 in the world for connected research, with Materials Science #363, Chemistry #375 close behind: the anchors to build consortia around.
  • Strong on influence and impact. Zhejiang Sci-Tech University sits in the 56th percentile for influence and the 42nd for impact: genuine, defensible strengths.
  • A genuine bridge, not just a hub. 80 of 92 partners (87%) are non-redundant, so it connects communities that would not otherwise meet.
Challenges
  • Diversity is the softest pillar. At the 6th percentile it sits clearly below the others: the single clearest place to build.
  • Health & Medicine is the at-risk domain. World #1,061 for connected research, far behind the rest of the portfolio: a real gap, not a crown jewel.
  • Network concentration. The top two partner countries (China and United States) carry about 87% of collaboration volume: depth, but a thin long tail.
Opportunities
  • Win University of Oxford. World top-4. University of Oxford is top-84 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Win UCL. World top-5. University College London is top-93 globally in Physical Sciences. Route: an NSFC / JSPS / A*STAR bilateral programme, or the Human Frontier Science Program.
  • Convert your highest-yield tie. Shanghai Jiao Tong University returns the highest impact of your partners (FWCI 3.6). 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.

260
h-index of the joint research base
1.6M
citations to co-authored work
2.38
field-weighted citation impact (FWCI)
15,148
co-authored works, 2021-2025
21
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.

Influence56th pctReach10th pctDiversity6th pctSustained16th pctImpact42nd pctInternational10th pctBrokerage24th pct

Zhejiang Sci-Tech University is strongest on influence (56th percentile), impact (42nd) and sustained (16th). Its brokerage diagnostic shows 80 of 92 partners (87%) are non-redundant, a genuine bridge between communities rather than a wide publisher.

The pillar to watch is Diversity (6th 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.

InflImpaSustEach block is a pillar’s weighted contribution; together they place the university in the global ranked cohort.
Influence22% weight56th pct+12.3
Impact18% weight42nd pct+7.6
Sustained18% weight16th pct+2.9
Reach16% weight10th pct+1.6
Diversity16% weight6th pct+1.0
International10% weight10th pct+1.0

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#1000Energy270Materials Science363Chemistry375Chemical Engineering416Pharmacology, Toxicolo…500Engineering545
Standout (top 50)Solid (top 150)Ranked

Zhejiang Sci-Tech University's strongest connected fields are Energy #270, Materials Science #363, Chemistry #375. The portfolio leans on physical sciences & engineering; Health & Medicine, at world #1,061 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 #1061 for connected research
11/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University109
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang Chinese Medi…30
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Nanjing Medical Unive…26
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…24
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wenzhou Medical Unive…22
Life Sciences
World #733 for connected research
39/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University211
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese…47
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…38
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Chinese Academy of Me…31
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang Chinese Medi…30
Physical Sciences & Engineering
World #275 for connected research
77/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University1,010
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University o…323
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Hangzhou Dianzi Unive…259
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong Un…183
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Donghua University178
Social Sciences
World #973 for connected research
19/100
Top collaboration partners
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University67
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University o…35
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Tongji University23
University of Macau23
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Ningbo University19
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 yieldZhejiang UniversitZhejiang UniversitDonghua UniversityTsinghua Universit
High yieldStandardLow yield

Shanghai Jiao Tong University returns the highest impact of the set (FWCI 3.6): a consortium waiting to happen. Donghua University, by contrast, is a sizeable partner returning FWCI 2.0: worth asking what that volume is buying.

PartnerJoint worksFWCIYield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University1,310 2.9Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University of Technology378 2.7Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Hangzhou Dianzi University283 2.2Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong University225 3.6High yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Donghua University194 2.0Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Ningbo University189 2.1Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences171 3.5Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ South China University of Technology170 2.6Standard
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Tsinghua University135 4.2High yield
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Tongji University124 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

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ China 8,085
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ United States 582
πŸ‡­πŸ‡° Hong Kong SAR 289
πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ United Kingdom 285
πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Australia 265
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡¦ Canada 182
πŸ‡ΈπŸ‡¬ Singapore 121
πŸ‡―πŸ‡΅ Japan 112

Anchor partner institutions

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University 1,310
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang University of Technology 378
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Hangzhou Dianzi University 283
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanghai Jiao Tong University 225
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Donghua University 194
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Ningbo University 189
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ University of Chinese Academy of Sciences 171
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ South China University of Technology 170

The network spans 57 countries and 660 universities, but the top two carry about 87% of the volume. That concentration is where the resilience question lives, and the Europe white-space (4 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.

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ 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

πŸ‡¦πŸ‡Ί Monash University Australia · world top-7

Monash University is top-215 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

πŸ‡¬πŸ‡§ University of Edinburgh United Kingdom · world top-9

University of Edinburgh is top-218 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.

EnergyEngineeringMaterials 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.

πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Zhejiang Chinese Medical UniversityChina
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Wuhan University of Science and TechnologyChina
πŸ‡¨πŸ‡³ Shanxi Medical UniversityChina
πŸ‡΅πŸ‡± Warsaw University of TechnologyPoland
πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Illinois CollegeUnited States
Advanced Photocatalysis TechniquesAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsTextile materials and evaluationsSupercapacitor Materials and FabricationAdvancements in Battery MaterialsElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion

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 University of Oxford 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 Shanghai Jiao Tong University 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 Zhejiang Sci-Tech University.

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.