The MFY Three-Variable Steady-State Model: A General Framework for Steady-State Regulation of Complex Open Systems — A Cross-Domain Logical Compatibility Test Based on Full-Spectrum Medical Paradigms

Translation Authorization Statement: The author of this paper hereby grants global authorization to any individual or institution to translate the full text or any part of this paper into other languages. The translated version must retain the complete core logic of the original text, clearly indicate the original source, author information and DOI of this preprint, and strictly comply with the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 International License.**Structured Abstract****Background**: Existing evolutionary theories have formed a complete explanatory closed loop at the biological and cognitive levels, but both share an absence of the value dimension. Modern medical specialties have developed a large number of gold-standard paradigms tested by long-term clinical practice, yet they lack a unified underlying analytical framework.**Methods**: Based on the natively and independently generated MFY Three-Variable Steady-State Model (Intrinsic Anchor Point, M; Intrinsic Direction, F; Regulatory Expectation, Y), this paper adopts the theoretical logical compatibility test method. We selected seven mature gold-standard paradigms of modern medicine covering the full life cycle, as well as the classic syndrome differentiation system of traditional Chinese medicine, to conduct a systematic isomorphism analysis of the cross-domain logical self-consistency of the MFY model.**Results**: The underlying steady-state regulation logic of all medical paradigms included in the analysis shows a high degree of structural isomorphism and logical compatibility with the MFY model. All paradigms follow the core structure of "anchor point - direction - regulation" and the intervention path of "expectation reconstruction → direction calibration → anchor point manifestation", suggesting that the model may capture a common underlying structure of steady-state regulation in complex open systems.**Conclusions**: The MFY framework provides a supplementary explanatory framework for the absence of the value dimension in existing evolutionary theories, and offers a new interdisciplinary tool for the unified analytical language across medical specialties and the structured decision-making in clinical psychology. Its cross-domain universality and clinical effectiveness need to be verified by subsequent independent empirical studies.