Let B n = { ( x 1 , … , x n ) | x i ∈ { 0 , 1 } , i = 1 , … , n } denote the set of vertices of the n-dimensional binary (unit) cube. Let α = ( α 1 , … , α n ) and β = ( β 1 , … , β n ) be two vertices of B n . α precedes β (by component-wise order), denoted as α ≼ β, if and only if α i ⩽ β i for 1 ⩽ i ⩽ n. α and β are comparable if α ≼ β or β ≼ α, otherwise, they are incomparable. A set of incomparable vertices in B n is also called a Sperner family. A set { α 1 , … , α k } of elements of B n is a growing chain if α i ≺ α j for 1 ⩽ i < j ⩽ k. A chain is simple if α i ≺ α j and there is no α r such that α i ≺ α r ≺ α j .

The serial number of the vertex α = ( a 1 , … , a n ) is the natural number a 1 2 n − 1 + a 2 2 n − 2 + ⋯ + a n 2 0 , whose binary representation is a 1 a 2 … a n .

We will also use the lexicographic order of vertices: α precedes β lexicographically ( α ≼ lex β) if either there exists an integer k, 1 ⩽ k ⩽ n, such that a k < b k and a i = b i for i < k, or α = β.

In literature there are different, sometimes confusing definitions of lexicographic order (Schröder, 2016). Mathematical definition is set-theoretical that uses the value 1 to code the presence of an element in a subset: x < lex y if min ( x Δ y ) ∈ x. Appearance of elements in a subset is coded by a binary vector, and vector α precedes vector β when α precedes β alphabetically. Here 1 < 0. When we apply to combinatorial settings, the hypercube is considered, and lexicographical order of vertices of B n , defined alphabetically, uses relation 0 < 1. We will use the standard set-theoretical definition indicated as lex in Fig. 1. revlex is the reverse of this, i.e. ( 00000 , 00001 , … , 11111 ). colex in set-theoretical settings means: x < co-lex y if max ( x Δ y ) ∈ y. This is convenient when we add a new dimension to the vectors intending to continue the ordered sequence when the initial segment remains unchanged. But as we see in Fig 1, colex, unlike the lex or revlex, preserves neither the order of numerical values nor the order on the layers of the hypercube graphically, in the Hasse diagram. The sim (simplicial) order lists hypercube vertices layer after the layer (see the next page for the concept of a layer); in each layer, vertices are ordered according to their serial number. We will use the revlex basically, but when there is no confusion we will refer to it simply as lex.

Lexicographic, co-lexicographic and simplicial orders are shown in Fig. 1 on the set of vertices of B 5 .

We define also partition/splitting of B n into two ( n − 1 )-dimensional sub-cubes according to the values of the binary variables; for arbitrary x i : B x i = 0 n − 1 = { ( x 1 , … , x n ) ∈ B n | x i = 0 } and B x i = 1 n − 1 = { ( x 1 , … , x n ) ∈ B n | x i = 1 } . Any subset M ⊆ B n will be partitioned into M x i = 1 ⊆ B x i = 1 n − 1 , and M x i = 0 ⊆ B x i = 0 n − 1 . B n can also be partitioned according to a set of variables. Partitioning according to variables x i 1 , … , x i k , we get 2 k number of ( n − k )-dimensional sub-cubes, where in each of them the values of x i 1 , … , x i k are fixed in an appropriate way; for example, B x i 1 = 1 , … , x i k = 1 n − k = { ( x 1 , … , x n ) ∈ B n | x i 1 = 1 , … , x i k = 1 } .

Figure 2 illustrates the split of the B 6 according to two variables.

Let L k = { ( x 1 , … , x n ) ∈ B n | ∑ i = 1 n x i = k }. We call L k the k-th layer of B n .

The shadow δ i M of M ⊆ B n is the set of vertices of L i , which are less than some vertex of M.

In case all the vertices of M are from the same layer, e.g. from the k-th layer, the lower (upper, respectively) shadow of M is δ k − 1 M ( δ k + 1 M, respectively), i.e. the set of vertices from the ( k − 1 )-th layer, which are less than some vertex of M (from the ( k + 1 )-th layer, which are greater than some vertex of M, respectively).

Boolean function f : B n → { 0 , 1 } is called monotone if for every two vertices α , β ∈ B n , if α ≺ β, then f ( α ) ⩽ f ( β ). Vertices of B n , where f takes the value “1”, are called units or true points of the function; vertices, where f takes the value “0”, are called zeros or false points of the function. α 1 is a lower unit (or minimal true point) of the function if f ( α 1 ) = 1, and f ( α ) = 0 for every α ∈ B n , such that α ≺ α 1 . α 0 is an upper zero (or maximal false point) of the function if f ( α 0 ) = 0, and f ( α ) = 1 for every α ∈ B n such that α 0 ≺ α. min T ( f ) and max F ( f ) denote the sets of minimal true points and maximal false points, respectively. Obviously, min T ( f ) and max F ( f ) are Sperner families in B n .

Formally, the work with MBFs started in 1897, with the issue of counting their number (Dedekind, 1895). The first algorithmic and complexity-related considerations belong to Korobkov (1965), where, in particular, the valuable concept of resolving subsets was introduced. The final asymptotic estimate about the number of MBFs of n variables was obtained in Korshunov (1981, 2003). The technique on how to introduce and analyse MBFs, is basically presented in Hansel (1966), Korshunov (2003), Lovász (2007).

The Hansel chain structure (Hansel, 1966) was invented in 1966 and played one of the central roles in MBF-related algorithmic techniques.

The next valuable step towards this was taken by Tonoyan (1979), who introduced a set of simple procedures (chain algebra) that serve all the actual queries about Hansel chains, providing a technical solution to all the problems related to algorithms with Hansel chains, without constructing and keeping them in computer memory. A slightly modified and simplified version of Sokolov (1987) is presented using tools such as: enumeration of all chains, and a procedure of finding the i-th vertex of the j-th chain.

A recurrent step of constructing Hansel chains in B n is the following (illustrated graphically in Fig. 3). Let l 0 be an arbitrary chain in B x n = 0 n − 1 , and let l 1 , geometrically, be the same chain in B x n = 1 n − 1 . Thorough the chain constructions, all pairs of chains like l 0 and l 1 are modified according the following rule. Chain l 1 is shortened by removing the last edge ( α 1 ′ , α 2 ′ ) from it, and chain l 0 is updated by adding a new edge ( α 2 , α 2 ′ ) to it. This construction provides one of the basic properties of Hansel chains in B n : the relative complement of three consecutive vertices of extended chain l 0 ′ belongs to the shortened chain l 1 ′ . Relative complement is a vertex α, that together with the growing chain of tree consecutive vertices α 1 , α 2 , α 3 composes a subcube of dimension 2.

We aim at extending this picture of chain-split to the lexicographic order of vertices in B n . At least, we note that the longest Hansel chain corresponds to the chain consisting of the first vertices of layers of B n under the lexicographic ordering. The mirrored chain of the last vertices under the lexicographic ordering will be considered as well.

In the MBF recognition problem using membership queries, the overall goal is to determine an unknown MBF of n variables using as few oracle queries (or tests) as possible. The function can be fully recognized by finding all its upper zeros (and/or lower units) (Korobkov, 1965). The Shannon complexity of finding all upper zeros (lower units) of an arbitrary monotone Boolean function of n variables is C n ⌊ n / 2 ⌋ + C n ⌊ n / 2 ⌋ + 1 (Hansel, 1966).

Another recognition structure is used in Sokolov (1987) and in its extensions. For even n, B n is split according to two variables and the recognition starts in the two middle layer sub-cubes of this construction. For odd n, firstly B n is split according to one variable, then as each sub-cube now has an even size, the procedure for even sizes is applied. This provides optimal recognition of all MBFs in the sense of Shannon complexity. Unfortunately, while simple and attractive, this approach cannot be used as a practical algorithm. Finally, it is worth to mention the work (Gainanov, 1984) that considers not the Shannon complexity, but the individual complexity of MBF given by its resolving set size.

In general, tasks related to the recognition of MBFs may have different formulations. One objective is to recognize a particular unknown function, knowing that it belongs to the class of MBFs or to one of its subclasses. Another goal is to start with partial knowledge about the unknown function, trying to complete the information. One more case is when the number of queries is restricted by some number k and the goal is to maximize the recognized part of the function (Sahakyan et al., 2022). Similar problems can be formulated for specific classes of Boolean functions. Examples of classes are as follows:

KK-MBF Kruskal-Katona MBFs arise as a result of the shadow minimization theorem (Kruskal, 1963; Katona, 1968, 1987). KK-MBFs are monotone Boolean functions but they also intersect the cube layers along their initial segments of the lexicographic order. The complement of the KK-MBF area in B n has a similar property; it is related to the initial segments of the reverse-lexicographic order, and they are anti-monotone.

Symmetric MBF This is a trivial class of functions that takes a constant value on the cube layers. Trivial, but these functions are practically important. Examples are majority functions, parity functions, and others (Nosov, 2023).

Threshold MBF Functions are defined by a linear inequality of weighted sums of variables.

Matroid MBF Monotone Boolean function f is called a matroid function if for each α , β ∈ min T ( f ) with α i = 1, β i = 0, there exists a coordinate j with α j = 0, β j = 1 such that vertex α ′ , obtained from α by replacing α i with 0 and α j with 1, belongs to min T ( f ).

The combinatorial complexity of reconstruction in these and other subclasses of MBFs is not well studied. For example, monotone Boolean functions, with zeros and units separated by two middle layers of the cube, are the most difficult functions for query-based reconstruction when only the monotonicity of the function is given. But if it is known that the function belongs to the class of symmetric functions, the reconstruction of this function can be done by n queries. The same function also belongs to the KK-MBF class. Knowing more MBF cases that are practically reconstructible enables system proctoring and application problem solving.

The initial formulations of the shadow theorem in Kruskal (1963), Katona (1968, 1987) are given in terms of co-lexicographic order, but this framework was later simplified to the simple lexicographic ordering (Aslanyan, 1979). The basic result was obtained for two neighbour layers of the cube. The name KK now refers to an extension of the basic result of the shadow minimization theorem to many layers of B n , as well as to results on the existence of Sperner families (Clements, 1973; Daykin et al., 1974). Usually, a KK-MBF function f is given through its characteristics, # min T ( f ) = ⟨ p i 1 , p i 2 , … , p i r ⟩, where p i j is the number of lower units of f on the i j -th layer. An example is given in Fig. 4.

First, let us introduce some general concepts from the field of reconstruction of Boolean functions (Korobkov, 1965). Suppose we are given a certain class S of Boolean functions and f ∈ S.

It follows from the definition that to reconstruct a function it is sufficient to determine its values on some of its resolving sets.

A resolving set G ( f , S ) is called a deadlock resolving set for ( f , S ), if no subset of it is resolving for the pair ( f , S ).

When S is the set of all monotone Boolean functions, then every function f ∈ S has a unique deadlock resolving set included in all its resolving sets; this is the set G ( f ) = min T ( f ) ∪ max F ( f ) (Korobkov, 1965). Thus, for a general MBF, the concept of deadlock resolving set is given by the set of all upper zeros and lower units of the function, which represent two interrelated Sperner systems.

It should be noted that this is not true for other Boolean functions and classes, for example, for the class of symmetric Boolean functions there are no unique deadlock resolving sets.

In this section, we investigate the existence of a deadlock resolving set for KK-MBF functions.

We formulate two simple properties for KK-MBF type functions f and call them horizontal and vertical conditions, denoting them as Cond-h and Cond-v.

Cond-h: (1)

if f ( α ) = 0 for a vertex α of some layer L k , then f ( β ) = 0 for all β ∈ L k reverse-lexicographically preceding α ( β ≼ revlex α),

These conditions, applied recursively, define a domain for each vertex α ∈ f; denote it by d ( f , α ). Domain is downward when f ( α ) = 0 and upward if f ( α ) = 1. A simple characterization of the domains can be given in terms of natural order of vertices (their serial numbers).

Note that not all vertices of B n with a higher (smaller) serial number than α, when f ( α ) = 1 ( f ( α ) = 0) are part of the d ( f , α ).

We also define the notion of corner points for KK-MBF type functions.

Let z ( f ) denote the set of all zero-corner points, and o ( f ) denote the set of all one-corner points of function f.

Summarizing all the above reasoning, we formulate the following statement.

For a general MBF, it is well-known that | min T ( f ) ∪ max F ( f ) | can reach the value C n ⌊ n / 2 ⌋ + C n ⌊ n / 2 ⌋ + 1 and as a consequence, recognition of these functions cannot be done with less complexity. Our first notion about the KK-MBF recognition complexity is an upper bound obtained for the value | z ( f ) ∪ o ( f ) |. Due to the resolving property of the set z ( f ) ∪ o ( f ), the estimate will show the number of required tests for reconstruction of KK-MBF functions.

It is still a question if the value 2 ( n − 1 ) is reachable. A simple view of exercises in Fig. 4 shows that the real number of corner points will be smaller, but at this point we aim at mentioning the big difference between the recognition complexities of general MBF and the KK-MBF.

Concerning the issue about the size of deadlock resolving sets we may refer to the Theorem 1 of Daykin et al. (1974) and to Clements (1973). Here, parametrized subsets of MBF are considered. Let us suppose that there are given numbers p 0 , p 1 , … , p n , denoting the quantities of upper zeros of functions on layers of B n . Existence theorems of Sperner families, i.e. existence of MBF by the sets { p 0 , p 1 , … , p n } are obtained. The first theorem, Daykin et al. (1974), transfers all p i to the layers upper the middle layer. The second theorem (Clements, 1973; Daykin et al., 1974) gives the necessary and sufficient condition of existence in terms of a formula based on Kruskal’s cascade properties (Kruskal, 1963).

Similar theorems could be formulated for KK-MBF, where p i s are the numbers of corner points in layers, and then p i s can be either 0 or 1. Thus, the formulas would obtain simpler Kruskal’s cascade forms. But in our case, the upper bound 2 ( n − 1 ) is relatively small and acceptable as a complexity estimation in comparison to C n ⌊ n / 2 ⌋ + C n ⌊ n / 2 ⌋ + 1 . The problem is how to effectively find the mentioned corner points algorithmically.

On the other hand, let us consider a series of KK-MBF functions, which provide a lower bound for | z ( f ) ∪ o ( f ) |.

Define corner points on layers as follows:

On the 1st layer we take two corner points: 1-corner point is the vertex ( 1 00 … 0 ︷ n − 1 ), the smallest vertex of B x 1 = 1 n − 1 in lex order; and 0-corner point is ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 2 ), the smallest vertex of B x 1 = 0 , x 2 = 1 n − 2 in lex order. These are two neighbour vertices on the 1st layer.

On the 2nd layer we construct two corner points as follows: 1-corner point is ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 3 1 ), the smallest vertex of the cube B x 1 = 0 , x 2 = 1 , x n = 1 n − 3 ; 0-corner point is ( 0011 00 … 0 ︷ n − 4 ), the smallest vertex of B x 1 = 0 , x 2 = 0 , x 3 = 1 , x 4 = 1 n − 4 , all in lex order.

This process is continued until one of the constructed subcubes becomes small and we reach a corner point defined by a 0-size subcube, i.e. a vertex.

Let us explain again the construction. Vertex ( 1 00 … 0 ︷ n − 1 ) is the smallest vertex on layer 1 of B n . Vertex ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 2 ) is its left neighbour (see Fig. 4). Vertex ( 1 00 … 0 ︷ n − 1 ) defines all vertices of B x 1 = 1 n − 1 as units of the function by Cond-h, and vertex ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 2 ) defines as zero only the vertex ( 00 … 0 ︷ n ). Upper area of vertex ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 2 ) still can be defined arbitrarily – either as a zero or as a unit. But we take the leftmost vertex ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 3 1 ) of the layer next to the layer of ( 01 00 … 0 ︷ n − 2 ) defining its value as unit. The left neighbour’s value we define as zero. This simple construction, repeated as long as possible, gives a series of KK-MBF functions. How many corner points may have these functions?

Starting from the first layer, we reach the last possible corner point on the:

( n / 2 )-th layer, if n is even – in this case we have 2 corner points on each layer starting from 1 to n / 2; and ( n + 1 ) / 2-th layer, if n is odd – in this case we have 2 corner points on each layer starting from 1 to ( n − 1 ) / 2, and one corner point on the ( n + 1 ) / 2-th layer.

In both cases, we get | z ( f ) ∪ o ( f ) | = n; and thus, n ⩽ max f ∈ KK - MBF | z ( f ) ∪ o ( f ) | ⩽ 2 ( n − 1 ) .

Hansel chain based MBF recognition methods are global tools and can be applied to recognize any class of monotone Boolean functions, including KK-MBF. However, we aim to exploit specific properties of this class of functions to achieve more efficient recognition. To go beyond the chain-based analysis, in this section we consider the recognition of KK-MBF functions at the level of analysis of particular layers of B n .

A useful step and exercise in recognitions is to determine the first and last nontrivial layers (trivial layers are those with all-zeros or with all units of the function). This can be done considering the following two chains of length n: L 1 that is the chain consisting of all first, and L 2 that is the chain consisting of all last elements of the lexicographic order of layers. L 1 is the longest Hansel chain in the chain split, see Fig. 3. Applying bisections on chains L 1 and L 2 , we can find two neighbouring layers ( k 1 , k 1 + 1 ) and ( k 2 , k 2 + 1 ) and vertices on chains L 1 and L 2 , respectively, where the function’s value changes from 0 to 1. This means that the layers from k 2 + 1 to n, and from 0 to k 1 are trivial, they accept values 0 and 1, correspondingly. Indeed, when first vertex of layer k 1 accepts 0, then the whole layer accepts 0. The layer k 1 and below is filled by values 0 (the trivial 0 layers), but in layer k 1 + 1 there exists at least one vertex with value 1 so that trivial layers interrupt here. Similar explanation is valid concerning the chain L 2 . The bisection procedure of each chain requires only log 2 ( n ) queries to the oracle.

On the other hand, if the vertices on each layer of B n are ordered lexicographically, we can apply layer by layer bisections and find a corner vertex candidate α k on the k-th layer with no more than log 2 ( C n k + 1 ) queries.

In this manner, a KK-MBF type function can be recognized by no more than ∑ k = 1 n log 2 ( C n k + 1 ) queries. A very rough estimate of this total value would be O ( n 2 ), as the largest layer is the middle k-th layer with k = [ n / 2 ], where C n [ n / 2 ] ∼ 2 n + 1 2 π n with n → ∞.

For KK-MBF functions the time complexity of Hansel algorithm remains ∼ C n [ n / 2 ] so O ( n 2 ) is a valuable reduction of the complexity characteristics. But the techniques of Tonoyan (1979) and Sokolov (1987) for the reduction of memory used in Hansel algorithm can not be applied in the case of our layer bisection approach.

To find a way to reduce the memory complexity we continue to address algorithmic questions on layers from an additional perspective. In order to apply bisections on layers, we need to keep all 2 n vertices (ordered lexicographically, layer-by-layer) in computer memory. Otherwise, we need to find a vertex by its number in lexicographic order, or by a distance from a certain vertex (again, in lexicographic order). There are no explicit formulas for this. Thus, both cases will require appropriate time and memory resource.

One way to avoid this situation is using sub-cube structures on layers when partitioning the cube. This is easily applicable to find the 0–1 border on layers, although it will require more than logarithmic queries on layers.

We will use α j k for the j-th element of L k in the lexicographic order. Then the smallest element of L k in the lexicographic order is α 1 k = ( 11 … 1 ︷ k 00 … 0 ︷ n − k ), and the largest one is the element α C n k k = ( 00 … 0 ︷ n − k 11 … 1 ︷ ) k .

Let B x 1 = 1 n − 1 and B x 1 = 0 n − 1 be the partitions of B n according to x 1 , and L k , x 1 = 1 and L k , x 1 = 0 denote the parts of L k in B x 1 = 1 n − 1 and B x 1 = 0 n − 1 , respectively. Then α 1 = ( 0 11 … 1 ︷ k 00 … 0 ︷ n − k − 1 ) is the lexicographically smallest element of L k , x 1 = 0 , and α 0 = ( 1 00 … 0 ︷ n − k 11 … 1 ︷ k − 1 ) is the lexicographically largest element of L k , x 1 = 1 .

Instead of taking the arithmetical middle vertex of L k to ask/test the function value, we take either α 1 or α 0 (for certainty, we will take α 1 ). If f ( α 1 ) = 1, then f ( α ) = 1 for all α ∈ L k , x 1 = 1 ; therefore, the next vertex that we will take to ask the function value is the largest element of L k , x 1 = 0 , x 2 = 0 (the part of L k in B x 1 = 0 , x 2 = 0 n − 2 ), this is element α 2 = ( 00 11 … 1 ︷ k 00 … 0 ︷ n − k − 2 ).

If f ( α 1 ) = 0, then f ( α ) = 0 for all α ∈ L k , x 1 = 0 ; therefore, the next vertex that we will take is the largest element of L k , x 1 = 1 , x 2 = 0 (the part of L k in B x 1 = 1 , x 2 = 0 n − 2 ), this is the element α 2 = ( 10 11 … 1 ︷ k − 1 00 … 0 ︷ ) n − k − 1 .

In general, in B x 1 = σ 1 , … , x i = σ i n − i the largest element of k-th layer is

σ 1 … σ i 11 … 1 ︷ x 00 … 0 ︷ y , where x is k minus the number of 1s in σ 1 … σ i , and y is ( n − k ) minus the number of 0s in σ 1 … σ i .

In this way, after each query, we continue in a smaller sub-cube, and hence, the number of queries in each layer can be at most n − 1. For the heaviest layer, for k = n / 2, we get the same estimate, but without either keeping all vertices in computer memory or calculating the given j-th vertex in the lexicographic order. Indeed, the number of vertices of middle layer equals C n [ n / 2 ] ∼ 2 n + 1 2 π n when n → ∞. Logarithm of this, the number of steps in dichotomy, is equivalent to n − 1, and so the partition by cube structures is simple and effective.

As an example, consider the function given in Fig. 4, and suppose that k = 3. Then,

α 1 = ( 01110 ), and since f ( 01110 ) = 0, the next vertex is

α 2 = ( 10110 ). f ( 10110 ) = 1, and it follows that the next is

α 3 = ( 10011 ). f ( 10011 ) = 1.

This way, we found the corner points f ( 01110 ) = 0 and f ( 10011 ) = 1 of the third layer.

So far, when recognizing KK-MBF functions layer by layer, we have only used the fact that the function satisfies the condition Cond-h and have not used the monotonicity of the function. Using the monotonicity will narrow the space for taking the next vertex for testing.

Suppose that α k is the smallest vertex of L k in the lexicographic order with f ( α k ) = 1. Denote by α k + 1 the lexicographically smallest upper neighbour of α k in L k + 1 . Then, at the next step, we need to consider only those vertices of L k + 1 , lexicographically smaller than α k + 1 .

For the given example in Fig. 4, ( 10100 ) is the smallest vertex of L 2 in the reverse-lexicographic order, where the function value is 1. Then, we will choose the next vertex in the interval [ ( 00111 ) , ( 10011 ) ] instead of [ ( 00111 ) , ( 11100 ) ].

But to calculate the length of the interval [ reverse-lexicographically first vertex of L k + 1 , α k + 1 ] we need to find the number of α k + 1 in lexicographic order. Effective solution of this problem is still open.

Here as well, one can use sub-cube structures, but the benefit is only in the case when f ( α k + 1 ) = 0.

We conclude the section with the following general note. It addresses an alternative partial order of vertices to the traditional monotony based order, where α ≼ β if α coordinate-wise precedes β. In terms of KK-MBF, each of the vertices α and β creates 2 domains: upper domains d ˆ ( f , α ) and d ˆ ( f , β ), when f ( α ) = f ( β ) = 1, and lower domains d ˇ ( f , α ) and d ˇ ( f , β ), when f ( α ) = f ( β ) = 0. In this case we define the following order: α ≼ d β if d ( f , α ) ⊆ d ( f , β ) with f ( α ) = f ( β ) = 0, and, which is the same, α ≼ d β if d ( f , α ) ⊇ d ( f , β ) with f ( α ) = f ( β ) = 1. Otherwise, vertices α and β are incomparable. We call this construction KK-poset. Sperner type family may be obtained as a simple extension of this concept to the case of KK-poset. Here, similar to general MBFs, each KK-MBF is given by two complementary Sperner families – one is composed by 0-corner points, and the other includes all maximal 1-corner points of the function. We obtain that the KK-MBF reconstruction is similar to the MBF reconstruction, just the basic space and poset is a bit different. The technique developed for the general MBF and the experiences may be used in the problem of reconstruction of KK-MBF functions. We consider this reduction and transfer from MBF to KK-MBF an interesting research topic that is worthy of further investigations.