跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+1已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 18:41 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-07 19:22 — 2026-11-08 19:22(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-08 18:41最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 18:39(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.02467

A dynamic backrest may help accommodate trunk movement, and multi-device work elicits more of it: An exploratory comparison of high-end office chairs under single- and multi-device tasks

Yejin Kang, Dusan Baek, Dongwoo Park, Kitae Hwang, Woojin Park

原文摘要

Dynamic-sitting office chairs are usually compared with static sitting rather than with each other, and the contribution of backrest deformability (lateral backrest movement) is unknown. Office work also increasingly spans multiple devices. Twenty healthy adults (10 men, 10 women) completed a 15-minute single-device and a 15-minute multi-device proofreading task on each of three chairs: two commercial dynamic-sitting chairs (T90, Aeron) and a T90 whose backrest lateral movement was mechanically fixed (T90-fixed). We recorded subjective ratings, head and trunk posture (inertial measurement units), upper trapezius and lateral gastrocnemius activity (electromyography), and task performance. Chair effects were largely null: T90 and Aeron did not differ in ratings or performance, posture and muscle activity showed only isolated, direction-inconsistent differences, and preferences were polarized. The standard T90 showed greater trunk movement (mean absolute angular velocity in yaw) than T90-fixed during the multi-device task (p = 0.042), which may indicate that its movable backrest helps accommodate trunk movement under demanding work; no other whole-sample posture, muscle, rating or performance measure differed between these two configurations, and replication is needed. Task effects were large and consistent: the multi-device task elicited greater and faster head, trunk and shoulder movement and higher upper trapezius activity than the single-device task, with lower reading throughput. Multi-device work thus imposes substantially greater movement demands than single-device work, which supports designing chairs that accommodate movement in modern work environments.

cs.HC

新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.02452

Adjustment control usability and dynamic accommodation in office chairs: A comparative study of two contemporary designs

Yejin Kang, Dusan Baek, Dongwoo Park, Kitae Hwang, Woojin Park

原文摘要

Adjustability is a core determinant of ergonomic fit in office chairs, but its benefits depend on users being able to operate the controls and, on the chair, continuing to support the body as posture changes during work. We compared two high-end office chairs, the T90 (Sidiz; Chair A) and the Aeron (Herman Miller; Chair B), in two experiments to explore which design features may explain differences between them. In Experiment 1, 20 participants adjusted ten controls common to both chairs and rated perceived adjustment difficulty on four items. Chair A had significantly lower overall difficulty (Wilcoxon signed-rank test, p = 0.008), with control-level advantages for headrest angle, armrest height, armrest rotation angle and lumbar support position; Chair B was easier for seat height, possibly because its side-mounted lever is more visible than Chair A's underside button. The headrest comparisons involved a third-party headrest fitted to Chair B, and control- and item-level tests were not corrected for multiple comparisons. In Experiment 2, the same participants completed a 15-minute multi-device task requiring repeated posture changes, reach and reorientation, then rated body-part discomfort, general comfort and satisfaction with five components. Discomfort and comfort did not differ; Chair A had higher satisfaction for the seat-pan and lumbar support (exploratory, uncorrected). Interviews suggested links to mechanism properties: Chair B's rear lumbar dial was often described as producing little perceptible change, and for controls without significant differences each chair appeared to leave a different aspect of the same need unmet. These findings suggest mechanical and interface properties that designers of adjustable office chairs may consider for dynamic, multi-device work.

cs.HC