The Framework
A framework designed for more contextual research intelligence
ONE is built to support a richer, more contextual, and more operational understanding of researchers, institutions, and research systems.
Built for a changing research assessment landscape.
Contextual. Multidimensional. Operational.
The framework is not an explanatory layer placed on top of the product. It shapes how ONE structures profiles, indicators, benchmarking logic, and research intelligence views.
Updated 2026-03-15
A living framework reference for outreach, briefing conversations, and platform trust building.
Why a new framework is needed
Research has outgrown the frameworks used to describe it
For decades, research evaluation and research intelligence have relied heavily on a relatively narrow set of signals, especially publication-based and citation-based indicators. These can be useful, but they capture only part of the reality of research activity, contribution, visibility, and positioning.
As expectations around research assessment evolve, the challenge is no longer only to criticize narrow metrics. It is to build better ways of understanding research that are more contextual, more multidimensional, and more usable in practice.
The ONE Framework was developed in response to that need.
The limits of narrow metric logic
Why narrow metric logic is no longer enough
A limited evidence model creates multiple distortions.
Out of context comparison
Researchers and institutions are often compared without adequate regard for field, role, environment, or peer context.
Invisible contributions
Important dimensions of research activity can remain weakly represented or entirely absent.
Static understanding
Periodic reporting and narrow indicators often fail to support a more dynamic view of research strength and development.
Weak reform implementation
Even where better principles exist, operational systems often lag behind, leaving institutions and agencies without appropriate infrastructure.
Core principles
What the framework is built on
Context is essential
Research profiles and institutional positions only become meaningful when understood in relation to relevant peers, environments, and trajectories. Context is not an optional refinement. It is part of what makes evaluation and interpretation more fair and more useful.
Research is multidimensional
No single metric can represent the range of ways in which researchers and institutions contribute, perform, interact, and create value. A richer evidence model is needed to avoid reducing research reality to a narrow set of proxies.
Responsible assessment needs operational form
The shift toward more responsible assessment cannot remain purely declarative. If institutions and agencies are expected to work differently, they need infrastructures that can support more contextual and meaningful analysis in practice.
Infrastructure shapes understanding
How data is structured, connected, and presented influences how research is perceived and acted upon. Better infrastructure does not just improve reporting. It expands what can be seen, compared, and understood.
From principles to platform design
How the framework translates into the platform
The ONE Framework is not a layer of language added on top of the product. It informs how the platform is built: how profiles are represented, how indicators are organized, how benchmarking is approached, and how different user groups can navigate research information.
Profiles with more context
Researchers and institutions are represented through richer profiles that can support a more complete view of research identity and positioning.
Indicators with more depth
The platform organizes evidence across multiple dimensions rather than collapsing interpretation into a single narrow lens.
Benchmarking with more fairness
Comparisons are designed to be more meaningful by taking peer context and positioning logic seriously.
Intelligence with more usability
The framework supports not only interpretation, but action: strategy, communication, analysis, and institutional learning.
Audience relevance
Why this matters for different audiences
For researchers
A more contextual framework can support fairer visibility, richer representation, and a stronger understanding of research contributions beyond narrow metrics.
Learn moreFor institutions
A multidimensional and contextual evidence layer can support better strategic intelligence, clearer positioning, and more credible internal and external narratives.
Learn moreFor agencies and policy actors
An operational framework helps bridge the gap between research assessment reform goals and the practical realities of research monitoring, analysis, and governance.
Learn moreWhy this matters now
The question is no longer whether assessment should evolve
Across the research system, there is growing recognition that narrow metric dependency is insufficient. Researchers, institutions, and policy actors are all operating in a landscape shaped by new expectations around fairness, transparency, and meaningful evaluation.
What remains underdeveloped in many contexts is the infrastructure capable of supporting that transition at scale. The ONE Framework is part of an effort to build that missing layer.
Not as abstraction, but as operational research intelligence.
Framework reference
Explore the framework in practice
The conceptual architecture above is paired with a live reference layer below. Use it to browse the current axes, dimensions, and indicators without turning the main page into documentation.
Axis: Performance
4 dimensions Ā· 36 indicators
Dimension: Academic Impact
Dimension: Academic Excellence
Dimension: Innovation & Originality
Dimension: Academic Activity
Axis: Scientific Community Interaction
4 dimensions Ā· 47 indicators
Dimension: Leadership
Dimension: Mobility & Collaboration
Dimension: Community Support
Dimension: Community Recognition
Axis: Societal Engagement
4 dimensions Ā· 48 indicators
Dimension: Openness
Dimension: Transference
Dimension: Public Outreach
Dimension: Fundraising
Axis: Integrity
7 dimensions Ā· 35 indicators
Dimension: Publication Record Integrity
Dimension: Data Quality & Record Consistency
Dimension: Authorship & Contribution Integrity
Dimension: Temporal Integrity & Output Dynamics
Dimension: Mentorship & Lineage Integrity
Dimension: Commitments, Pledges & Verified Behaviour
Dimension: Review & Gatekeeping Integrity
Indicators
Search measures, tags, or definitions included in the current framework.
Number of advisory boards or high-level evaluative or advisory committees (e.g., major funding calls, awards, or research programs such as ERC, NSF, NIH, Japan - for advisory activities in companies use Advisory Board in the Transference dimension), on which the author has served, reflecting their expertise and contributions to high-level decision-making processes.
Average rating of an advisorās ability to support mentees in career development, funding, and progression.
Average rating of an advisorās effectiveness in facilitating collaborations and networking opportunities.
Average rating of an advisorās ability to foster an inclusive, respectful, and supportive environment.
Average rating of an advisorās guidance on research integrity, responsible conduct of research, authorship practices, data management, and ethical decision-making.
Average rating of an advisorās ability to provide scientific and technical guidance to mentees.
Number of times the author has actively advocated for causes or policies related to their expertise.
Score reflecting the consistency and verifiability of reported affiliations, based on the presence of persistent institutional identifiers (e.g. ROR IDs) in affiliation records.
Number of formal appointments held by the researcher, including academic, institutional, advisory, or governance roles.
Number of artistic performances.
Cohort-level aggregation identifying the skills most valued by mentees in their advisors, based on structured feedback.
Number of individual chapters contributed to edited volumes, reflecting expertise within collaborative works.
Number of times the author served as an editor of a book.
Number of books authored by the researcher, including academic, professional, or outreach publications.
Number of times the author chaired a meeting, committee, or panel.
Total count of journal articles, conference proceedings, and review papers, which serve as common vehicles for disseminating research findings.
Total citations for all publications attributed to the author.
The proportion of citations received that originate from works in emerging fields or novel areas of study.
Number of citations from patent documents.
Number of citations from policy documents.
Number of the author's publications are cited in guidelines.
Number of curated or created collections (e.g., specimen banks, historical archives, reference datasets, or publicly shared resource repositories) developed by the researcher and made accessible for scholarly or educational use.
Times the author served on organizing committees.
Number of advisory boards within companies or industry organizations on which the author has served, highlighting their influence and contribution to any sector of the economy: commercial, industrial or raw materials.
The number of grants awarded to the researcher through competitive funding processes.
Number of consulting engagements provided by the researcher to external organizations, typically project-based or time-bounded, including expert consulting and technical advisory services.
Average number of countries represented per paper.
Number of creative or heritage-related pieces produced, curated, or contributed to by the researcher, including artistic works and archaeological or cultural heritage artifacts.
Total number of successful crowdfunding campaigns conducted by the researcher through public platforms specifically designed to support research projects.
Number of datasets shared in open repositories.
Number of practical demonstrations, manuals, or educational kits created by the author.
Number of designs authored by the researcher.
Quantifies how much a researcher's publications disrupt existing knowledge by replacing prior work in subsequent citations.
Number of distinctions, awards, honors, or recognitions received by the researcher in academic, professional, or societal contexts.
Number of distinct institutions types (e.g., university, research center, private company, etc), with which the researcher has been affiliated throughout their career.
Count of all publications across different types (journals, proceedings, editorials, books, patents, reports, etc.).
Total Documents divided by years active.
Number of times the author has been appointed as Editor
Number of editorial board memberships held by the researcher in scholarly journals, book series, or academic publishing platforms.
Number of editorials written by the author
Number of educational committees, boards, or academic governance bodies in which the researcher has served, contributing to curriculum design, program evaluation, or academic policy.
Number of companies or spinoffs founded by the author.
Number of essays authored by the researcher (e.g., reflective, opinion, or narrative pieces) related to research, higher education, science, or societal topics, published in any medium.
Number of exhibitions or public events where the author has palyed any of these roles: advisor, commisioner, contributor.
Ratio of citations to a given work to the average citations for works of the same type, year, and discipline.
Measures the number of times a researcher's publications are cited in patents.
Measures the diversity of funding sources secured by the researcher, including government grants, philanthropic donations, and private sponsorships.
Number of genetic sequences shared in databases such as PubMed.
Number of non-academic publications authored by the researcher to communicate scientific knowledge to the general public. This includes online blogs, articles in newspapers or in popular science magazines, and other formats aimed at making complex topics accessible and engaging for a broader audience.
Number of oral presentations delivered by the researcher for general audiences.
Number of distinct countries involved in documents in internacional collaboration.
Number of governing boards on which the author has served, reflecting their expertise and contributions to high-level decision-making processes.
Number of guidelines authored by the researcher.
Maximum value of h such that the author has at least h papers, each cited at least h times.
Count of publications within the 90th percentile of citations among works of the same type, year, and discipline.
Number of projects, events, or initiatives supported through financial sponsorships from institutions, corporations, or foundations, reflecting the author's ability to attract and collaborate with external partners to fund their research.
Average number of organizations per paper.
Quantifies the degree to which a researcher's publications connect previously unrelated fields or disciplines.
Number of distinct academic fields or disciplines the author has engaged in.
Total number of unique international co-authors an author has collaborated with throughout their career.
Percentage of publications co-authored with researchers from different countries.
The amount of funding secured from international funding agencies or organizations.
Percentage of international publications led by the author.
Number of patents filed through international or regional routes, such as European (EPO) or International (PCT) filings.
Number of interviews in which the researcher participated to communicate scientific knowledge, expertise, or research-related perspectives to non-specialist audiences. This includes interviews in newspapers, magazines, radio, television, podcasts, online media, and other public-facing formats.
Number of appointments as invited professor, visiting scholar, or lecturer.
Number of journal delisting events affecting venues where the researcher has published, based on authoritative indexing or registry sources. Events are recorded independently of author intent.
Ratio of citations to a given work to the average citations for works of the same type, year, and journal.
Number of times the author has led initiatives for the scientific community, such as creating repositories for data or methods.
Number of patents reported as licensed or exploited, excluding those marked as 'not yet'.
Score reflecting the completeness of mentorship and advisory lineage records, based on the presence of key fields such as role, institution, and time period.
Number of distinct mentorship and advisory relationships reported by the researcher, including advisor, advisee, mentor, and mentee roles.
Weighted composite indicator reflecting overall mentorship quality, combining scientific guidance, career support, collaboration opportunities, and inclusivity.
The number of 'how-to' documents or resources shared with peers, including but not limited to mathematical, experimental, chemical, computational, and laboratory techniques.
Number of monographs authored or co-authored by the researcher.
Number of original music pieces composed or published by the author as part of their research-related, educational, or outreach activities.
Number of collaborative networks in which the researcher participates.
The percentage of the author's total citations that come from external sources, excluding self-citations. This indicator highlights the influence of the author's work on the broader research community, showing how often their research is cited by other researchers.
Measures the diversity of citations received, focusing on whether the citing works span multiple disciplines or research areas.
Number of documents where the author is in a leading authorship position, specifically as the first author, last author, or corresponding author, indicating their primary role in the research work.
Percentage of publications available in open-access format.
Measures the proportion of publications where the researcher is the first or sole author in a novel topic area.
Number of other research-related outputs produced by the researcher that do not fall into standard publication or activity categories.
Count of publications within the 99th percentile of citations among works of the same type, year, and discipline.
Number of times the author has served as a panelist or member of an evaluative committee for calls or awards.
Binary flag indicating whether the set of detected anomaly signals exceeds a configurable threshold such that an author review is recommended. This is a diagnostic governance feature, not an allegation.
Count of detected anomaly signals that may warrant review for potential paper-mill style patterns. Signals are heuristic and governance-sensitive, and do not constitute evidence of misconduct.
Number of distinct patent jurisdictions or filing routes represented in the researcher's patent record.
Number of patents filed, granted, or licensed by the researcher, reflecting technological innovation and knowledge transfer activities.
Number of patents filed via the International (PCT) route, typically indicating intent to seek protection across multiple jurisdictions.
Number of projects funded by philanthropic organizations, foundations, or individuals who contribute to research projects out of a commitment to advancing science or addressing societal challenges.
Number of clinical trials for which the author was the Principal Investigator.
The number of large-scale, multi-institutional projects or research programs led by the researcher.
Number of times the author served as Principal Investigator in competitive funding projects.
Number of poster presentations delivered by the researcher at scientific conferences, workshops, or academic events.
Number of publications freely available in pre-print format.
Number of projects funded by the European Union Commission.
Number of proteins and amino acid sequences shared.
Number of publications with public-private institutional affiliations.
Percentage of public-private sector publications led by the author.
Number of published corrections associated with the researcherās scholarly works. Corrections are contextual integrity signals attached to publications and do not imply misconduct.
Number of publication curation actions performed by the researcher to improve the accuracy of their publication record, including removing misattributions and resolving duplicates.
Categorical indicator reflecting the degree of discrepancy between the number of publications reported in the CV and the number of publications associated with the researcher in external bibliographic sources (e.g. OpenAlex). Levels are scaled relative to record size and intended to signal whether author review is recommended.
Indicates that the researcher has completed an authorship review process and confirmed their publication record within the defined validity window.
Total number of scholarly works reported in the CV, including journal articles, conference papers, reviews, preprints, books, chapters, editorials, corrections, and other scholarly outputs.
Number of publications appearing in journals or venues that have been discontinued, removed, or are no longer active. This indicator provides contextual information about the publication record.
Number of publications appearing in venues flagged as potentially predatory according to curated or external reference lists. These signals are provided for contextual review.
Ratio between the actual number of HCPs and the expected number (10% of the author's publications).
Ratio between the actual number of OPs and the expected number (1% of the author's publications).
Number of research reports, white papers, or similar documents authored by the researcher, which provide detailed analysis or findings on specific topics, often for practical application or policy guidance.
Number of publications available in freely accessible repositories.
Number of times the author has peer-reviewed publications.
Number of distinct mentorship roles represented in the researcherās lineage (e.g., advisor, advisee, mentor, mentee), indicating diversity of mentoring engagement.
Voluntary contributions to creating safe, respectful, and gender-inclusive research environments. This includes counselling, mentoring, allyship, and support to colleagues facing harassment, discrimination, or gender-related challenges.
Number of shared samples, including biological specimens, synthetic materials, circuits, devices, or other physical prototypes provided for research or educational purposes.
Number of educational activities or programs led by the author in elementary schools, such as workshops, talks, or special learning sessions for students.
Counts verified or declared science-for-policy advisory and communication activities (e.g., ONAC, SAM, ministerial consultations, international panels). Weighted by advisory level.
Number of times the author has been among the founders of a scientific Council.
Number of times the author has been among the founders of a scientific journal.
The percentage of the author's total citations that are self-citations, reflecting the proportion of citations attributed to the author's own prior work. This metric provides insight into the extent to which the author references their previous studies within their research output.
Citations where the author references their own previous work, indicating the continuity or development of their research. This metric reflects how often an author builds upon their prior studies, which can provide insights into the progression and interconnectedness of their research contributions.
Number of scientific societies founded by the author.
Number of scientific societies of which the author is a member.
Number of software applications or libraries shared on repositories like GitHub.
Number of instances in which the researcher actively sponsored or endorsed others by using their professional position, reputation, or networks to support opportunities such as nominations, recommendations, or formal endorsements.
Instances in which the researcher has received sponsorship or endorsement through professional, institutional, or programme-based support.
Number of teaching activities carried out in an academic environment beyond the standard teaching duties associated with a professorship.
Number of distinct institutions where the researcher has performed teaching activities, based on reported teaching records.
Number of distinct teaching levels at which the researcher has taught, such as degree, masterās, and doctoral programmes.
Number of academic supervision activities carried out by the researcher, including undergraduate final projects, masterās theses, and doctoral dissertations, reflecting their contribution to training and mentorship.
The cumulative amount of funding secured by the researcher from competitive grants, contracts, and sponsorships (all sources).
Number citable documents reciving more citations than the 90% of documents in the field in the last x months
Percentage of the author's publications that have not been cited by other researchers, reflecting the reach and influence of their research output within the academic community.
Number of projects funded by the United States Government.
Number of utility models authored by the researcher.
Number of multimedia channels managed by the author for science communication.
See how the framework becomes usable in practice
Explore the public pathways or contact us about how the framework supports practical research intelligence.
