Bibliographic record
Abstract
To examine what conceptualizations of isolation and loneliness are potentially internalized by readers, this article draws on the social isolation aspect found in the multidisciplinary work of Roelof Hortulanus, Anja Machielse, and Ludwien Meeuwesen. This article then deconstructs how social networks are portrayed in the Harry Potter novel series to shape the extent, nature, and divergent manifestations of loneliness (and vice versa). Special attention will be paid to the Harry Potter’s and Tom Riddle’s social networks before and during their formative years at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and how these impacted their experiences of social isolation, loneliness, and eventual social development. The novels’ engagement with the theme of loneliness provides thought-provoking insights into the series’ commentary on the relationships between students and peers, students and teachers, and students’ internalization or rejection of the school climate. Through a careful examination of Rowling’s parallels between Harry Potter and Tom Riddle, the article argues that the author gives a complex, albeit sometimes dark portrayal of the potential of social networks that provides the reader with useful images and references to explore the theme of loneliness, and offers some important lessons on the importance of the school as a powerful locus for mediating alienation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".