ArticleScientific reports2025
The analysis of interactive furniture design system based on artificial intelligence.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A need-driven design research of modular functional armchairs for young adults.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To enhance user interaction experience in furniture customization, this study optimizes an Internet of Things (IoT)-driven Artificial Intelligence (AI)-assisted design system. First, the study analyzes human-computer interaction theories in IoT environments. Second, a personalized furniture design model based on a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) is constructed. This enhances the AI-assisted design system's ability to generate diverse design solutions while avoiding the limitations of traditional systems. Compared to other deep learning architectures (e.g., encoder-decoder networks), GAN excels in generating realistic and creative furniture design solutions. Finally, virtual reality (VR) technology is integrated to enable real-time interaction between users and customized furniture. The Kano model is used to evaluate the interactive features of the furniture. The results show that in the proposed interactive furniture customization system, female users prioritize comfort, convenient control functions, and safety. They also expect a smooth and intuitive interaction experience. Male users focus more on convenient control functions, visualization features, and safety, with Proportion of Attractive Quality (PA) scores of 60.80%, 56.32%, and 73.18%, respectively. Younger users significantly value visualization features and convenient control functions while also emphasizing safety. Middle-aged and elderly users prioritize operational functionality and comfort, with relatively lower demand for social and entertainment features. In terms of income levels, low-income users mainly focus on comfort, operational functionality, and safety, with PA values of 60.12%, 66.21%, and 72.35%, respectively. Middle-income users show higher demand for visualization features, with a PA value of 55.21%. High-income users emphasize safety and comfort more. The designed system effectively highlights the preferences of users across different genders, age groups, and income levels, enabling flexible design adjustments based on user characteristics. This method better meets the personalized needs of diverse users while addressing the limitations of traditional AI-assisted design systems in generating diverse solutions. It provides new insights for smart furniture design, enhancing adaptability and flexibility, and promoting technological innovation and interdisciplinary integration. This study holds significant academic value and practical application prospects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.