I play on the same function axis as you [MENTION=23960]chado[/MENTION], but as I understand the Ni/Se axis is something similar to Ne/Si... but different too. To me, Si is what gives the depth, the fragments of understanding, the material, that raw data, and Ne is what ties it all together. Ne itself is rather shallow by nature, of being an extroverted function, an exploratory function, such as Se.
So, from an outsiders perspective, and in understanding my own process, I see the parallel of the Ni/Se axis as playing on similar grounds as Ne/Si, except that it is the intuition, that has the depth and nuances, but pulls from a shallow understanding of the outside world.
Basically, from my jibberish above, Ne and Se are essentially looking at the same thing, but one is abstract, one is not. Ni and Si are looking at the same thing, one is abstract, one is not. Where you pull your concrete data from and what you pull your depth of understanding from, will depend on which function axis you use.
In my perspective and experience with users of the type, the Ni/Se axis can feel, to me, as rather superficial in their understanding of patterns, since their understanding of the external world is shallow by nature, being that their extroverted function is superficial. Whereas, I feel my patterns and associations are shallow or short sighted, but the connections made, exist between a much deeper understanding of the world around me.