Research on Mathematical Logic in Syndrome Theory of TCM and False Proposition Features of“Element of Syndrome”
10.11842/wst.2015.06.027
- VernacularTitle:中医证候理论内蕴的数学逻辑关系研究--兼论“证素”研究的伪命题特征＊
- Author:
Xiling SUN
;
Qiusheng ZHENG
;
Donglin YU
;
Zhuojun LIU
;
Chong HUANG
;
Mengan LIU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Syndrome;
process of syndrome differentiation;
mathematical logic;
Googol;
element of syndrome;
false proposition
- From:
World Science and Technology-Modernization of Traditional Chinese Medicine
2015;(6):1274-1279
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Through the study on mathematical logic relation in the syndrome theory of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), it revealed that the mathematical logic relation among three basic elements in the judgment of syndromes, which were the disease cause (a), disease location (b), disease nature (c) and syndrome (z), was f(z)=a+b+c. The mathematical logic relation between syndrome (z) and symptom (zi) was f(z)= z1+z2+z3+…+zi. The obvious feature reflected by the complexity of syndromes was the construction number of symptoms. During the syndrome differentiation process, the mathematical logic relation between symptom and disease cause, location, nature and syndrome was z1+z2+z3+…+zi =a+b+c= f(z). However, syndromes generally exhibited a nonlinear relationship of point-set topology. After calculation, 79 major single TCM syndromes had a total of more than 6.5×105 different forms. The number within a certain range of syndrome group was approximately 6.6×10100. The super huge data “Googol” may be the root of complex TCM syndromes. The results showed that the researches on “element of syndrome” using the bayesian networks, the neural network algorithm and the algorithm of double levels of frequency power were irrelevant to the mathematical logic relation of the intrinsic relations of syndrome theory. Therefore, “element of syndrome” was a false proposition feature in the study of TCM basic theory. The established syndrome differentiation method with“element of syndrome” as its core was not conformed to the inherent law of TCM theory and clinical practice.
