ICLR
ICLR 2026

Characterizing Human Semantic Navigation in Concept Production as Trajectories in Embedding Space

Felipe D. Toro-Hernández1  ·  Jesuino Vieira Filho2  ·  Rodrigo M. Cabral-Carvalho1

All authors contributed equally

UFABC 1 Federal University of ABC
Center of Mathematics, Computing & Cognition
UdeM 2 Université de Montréal
Dept. of CS & Operations Research
The Problem

Human semantic navigation: moving through concepts

Clustering and switching between semantic categories

Navigation through semantic representations is often characterized in terms of clustering and switching.

This misses the step-by-step granularity — the continuous geometry of how meaning unfolds over time.

Existing NLP pipelines are labor-intensive, heterogeneous, and hard to compare across studies.

→ What if we framed semantic retrieval as a trajectory through geometric space?

Key Idea

Cumulative embeddings capture search history

Cumulative embeddings capture search history

Each word xt encodes the full prefix up to step t.

Step 1: embed "cat"
Step 2: embed "cat dog"
Step 3: embed "cat dog shark"
  ⋮

This captures dependencies between successive items — semantic retrieval is inherently cumulative.

Working memory and inhibitory control shape each response based on all previous ones.

Result: a unique trajectory per participant × concept pair

Methods

Five physics-inspired trajectory metrics

Five physics-inspired trajectory metrics

① Distance to Next

Cosine distance between consecutive points. Semantic jump size.

② Velocity

vt = xt+1 − xt
Direction + magnitude of each step.

③ Acceleration

at = vt+1 − vt
Low → stable cluster. High → erratic switch.

④ Entropy

Shannon entropy of median-split steps. Predictability of the search.

⑤ Distance to Centroid

Distance to mean position of all items. Dispersion of the search.

Experimental Setup

Four datasets · Four languages · Two tasks

🧠

Neurodegenerative

ES 🇨🇱 · N=76 · Property Listing Task

Three groups: Healthy Controls (HC), Parkinson's Disease (PD), and behavioral variant Frontotemporal Dementia (bvFTD).

🤬

Swear Fluency

EN 🇺🇸 · N=274 · Verbal Fluency Task

Three categories: swear words, animals, and letters. Compares structured vs. taboo lexicons.

🇮🇹

Italian PLT

IT · N=69 · Property Listing · 10 categories

Cross-linguistic validation of trajectory metrics across semantic categories.

🇩🇪

German PLT

DE · N=73 · Property Listing · 10 categories

Parallel protocol to Italian. Different cultural-linguistic structure.

OpenAI text-embedding-3-large Google text-embedding-004 Qwen3-Embedding-0.6B fastText (baseline)

Statistics: Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) with Tukey HSD post-hoc correction.

Results

Neurodegenerative patients show erratic, constricted navigation

Healthy vs neurodegenerative trajectory comparison

↑ Higher in patients

Distance to Next — larger semantic jumps
Velocity — erratic movement
Acceleration — abrupt direction changes
Entropy — unpredictable search

↓ Lower in patients

Distance to Centroid — search confined to a tighter neighborhood despite being more volatile.

Interpretation: a kinematic signature of executive dysfunction — volatile trajectories within a diminished semantic space.

PD and bvFTD did not differ from each other — both show similarly disrupted navigation relative to healthy controls.

Results

Swear words & cross-linguistic structure

Animals vs swear words semantic structure

Swear Words

Highest kinematic values. Taboo lexicons lack sub-category structure → high variability in a compact space.

Animals

Lowest kinematic values, highest centroid distance. Structured sub-categories allow organized exploitation.

🇮🇹 IT · 🇩🇪 GE — Cross-linguistic

Italian and German datasets reveal language-specific category discrimination. Same protocol, but different category effects — cultural and linguistic structure shapes how meaning is organized.

Cross-linguistic category structure
Robustness

Different models, convergent geometry

Inter-model agreement per metric

✓ Robust across models

Velocity, Acceleration, Distance-to-Next — high cross-model correlation. Local trajectory dynamics are encoder-invariant.

✓ Entropy: near-perfect

Depends on rank ordering, not absolute distances. Median binarization absorbs model differences.

⚠ Centroid: model-dependent

Static global average is more sensitive to each model's high-level geometry. Potential tool for comparing how models structure knowledge.

Different models learn similar local dynamics despite different training pipelines (causal vs. bidirectional).

Key Finding

Cumulative vs. non-cumulative: trajectory length matters

Cumulative vs non-cumulative trajectory comparison

Cumulative → long sequences

Neurodegenerative (~20 items) · Swear Fluency (~21 items)

Longer trajectories provide rich context that cumulative embeddings leverage — more significant group differences and higher effect sizes.

Non-cumulative → short sequences

Italian (~5 items) · German (~5.5 items)

With only ~5 items, there is too little context to accumulate. Point-to-point variation retains more discriminative signal.

Practical guideline: use cumulative for ≥15 items (fluency tasks), non-cumulative for ≤6 items (property listing). Both approaches are complementary.

Conclusion

A geometric framework for human semantic navigation

Cumulative trajectory metrics capture fine-grained navigation dynamics beyond binary clustering/switching.

Clinical utility — distinguishes neurodegenerative patients from controls via kinematic signatures of executive dysfunction.

Cross-linguistic & cross-domain — discriminates semantic categories and reveals language-specific organization.

Model-robust — convergent results across three embedding architectures for local dynamics.

Future: temporal timestamps · non-Euclidean metrics · richer information theory · applying the framework to LLMs — comparing human vs. artificial semantic navigation.

BibTeX

@inproceedings{
toro-hernandez2026characterizing,
title={Characterizing Human Semantic Navigation in Concept Production as Trajectories in Embedding Space},
author={Felipe Diego Toro-Hern{\'a}ndez and Jesuino Vieira Filho and Rodrigo M. Cabral-Carvalho},
booktitle={The Fourteenth International Conference on Learning Representations},
year={2026},
url={https://openreview.net/forum?id=QQVmIR97sf}
}