User blog comment:P進大好きbot/Proposal to Choose an Official Standard OCF in This Wiki/@comment-11227630-20191219030804/@comment-35470197-20191219225243

Right. A specific proof for the OCF based on M (not on K, though) is explained in the corresponding paper. On the other hand, no proof for the OCF based on K is explained in the paper which you refered, and hence I am not certain whether my rough sketch of a proof is correct or not. That is why I wrote "if I am correct". The lack of Ω just causes a simple shift of the Mahloness degree. (Indeed, I constructed an OCF without using Ω here under the assumption that my computation is correct.)