Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/HTML-CSS/jax.js

Analysis of strong decays of SU(3) partners of Ω(2012) baryon

Figures(2) / Tables(4)

Get Citation
T. M. Aliev, S. Bilmis and M. Savci. Analysis of the strong decays of SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) baryon[J]. Chinese Physics C. doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/ad446a
T. M. Aliev, S. Bilmis and M. Savci. Analysis of the strong decays of SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) baryon[J]. Chinese Physics C.  doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/ad446a shu
Milestone
Received: 2024-03-26
Article Metric

Article Views(1071)
PDF Downloads(17)
Cited by(0)
Policy on re-use
To reuse of Open Access content published by CPC, for content published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (“CC CY”), the users don’t need to request permission to copy, distribute and display the final published version of the article and to create derivative works, subject to appropriate attribution.
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Email This Article

Title:
Email:

Analysis of strong decays of SU(3) partners of Ω(2012) baryon

  • 1. Department of Physics, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, 06800, Turkey
  • 2. TUBITAK ULAKBIM, Ankara, 06510, Turkey

Abstract: We estimate the coupling constants and decay widths of the SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) hyperon, as discovered by the BELLE Collaboration, using the distribution amplitudes of the octet baryons within the light cone sum rules method. Our study includes a comparison of the obtained results for the relevant decay widths with those derived within the framework of the flavor SU(3) analysis. We observe a good agreement between the predictions of both approaches. Moreover, our result on the decay width of ΩΞK is compatible with the existing experimental result within the uncertainties of the model predictions. These results can provide helpful insights for determining the nature of the SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) baryon.

    HTML

    I.   INTRODUCTION
    • In 2018, the BELLE Collaboration made an exciting announcement regarding the discovery of the Ω(2012) hyperon. This discovery was based on the ΩΞ0K and ΩΞK0s decay channels, with a measured mass of m=2012.4±0.7(stat)±0.6(sys)MeV and decay width of Γtot=6.4+2.52.0(stat)±1.6(sys)MeV [1]. However, knowing only the mass of the state is not sufficient to determine the quantum numbers of a state. For instance, within the QCD sum rule method, the mass of the Ω(2012) baryon is estimated, assuming it to be either the 1P or 2S excitation state [2]. Both assumptions yield the same mass value, although the estimated residues differ. Thus, additional physical quantities, such as the decay width, are necessary to identify the quantum numbers of newly discovered particles.

      In a previous study [3], the Ω(2012)Ξ0K transition was investigated, and its corresponding decay width was estimated by considering two possible scenarios for Ω(2012): either a 1P or 2S state. A comparison of the total decay widths obtained in this work led to the conclusion that Ω(2012) is itself a JP=32 state. Moreover, predictions from various theoretical models also converge on the likely quantum numbers JP=32 for the observed state [415].

      In this study, considering Ω(2012) as the JP=32 state, the strong couplings of the SU(3) partners of this state are investigated within the framework of light cone sum rules (LCSRs) using the distribution amplitudes (DAs) of the octet baryon. Note that this problem was also investigated in [16] using the flavor SU(3) symmetry approach.

      The structure of this paper is as follows. Section II introduces the LCSRs for the strong couplings of the transition 3212+ + pseudoscalar mesons. Section III provides a numerical analysis of the LCSRs, focusing on the relevant strong couplings. Within this section, we also present the computed values of the decay widths based on the obtained coupling constants. Additionally, we compare our results with those obtained using the flavor SU(3) symmetry method. Finally, our conclusions are summarized in Section IV.

    II.   LCSRs FOR THE STRONG COUPLINGS OF THE SU(3) PARTNERS OF Ω(2012)
    • To calculate the strong couplings of SU(3) partners, denoted as 32 states in the following discussions, we introduce the vacuum-to-octet baryon correlation function:

      Πμν(p,q)=id4xeiqx0|T{ημ(0)Jν(x)}|O(p),

      (1)

      where ημ represents the interpolating current of the decuplet baryons, Jν=ˉq1γνγ5q2 is the interpolating current of the pseudoscalar mesons, and |O(p) represents the octet baryon state.

      The interpolating current of the decuplet baryons can be written as

      ημ=εabcA{(qaT1Cγμqb2)qc3+(qaT2Cγμqb3)qc1+(qaT3Cγμqb1)qc2},

      (2)

      where a,b,c are the color indices, C is the charge conjugation operator, and A is the normalization factor. The quark content of the decuplet baryons and the normalization factor A are presented in Table 1.

      Aq1q2q3
      Δ+1/3uud
      Σ+(3/2)1/3uus
      Σ0(3/2)2/3uds
      Σ (3/2)1/3dds
      Ξ0 (3/2)1/3ssu
      Ξ(3/2)1/3ssd
      Ω1sss

      Table 1.  Quark content of the decuplet baryons and the normalization factor A.

      To derive the LCSRs for the strong coupling constants, the correlation function is computed in two ways: in terms of hadrons and in terms of quark-gluon fields within the deep Euclidean domain. By applying the quark-hadron duality ansatz, the relevant sum rules can be derived.

      Strong coupling constants appear in the double dispersion relation for the correlation function given in Eq. (1). Hence, to calculate these constants, the double dispersion relation for the correlation function must be calculated. The double dispersion relation is obtained via analytical continuation of the imaginary part of the corresponding invariant amplitudes with respect to the variables p2 and q2 in the spin-3/2 and pseudoscalar meson channels, respectively.

      Before delving into the details of the calculations, it is important to highlight the following aspect: the interpolating current for the decuplet baryons interacts not only with the ground positive parity states JP=32+ , but also with the negative parity states JP=32 and even with the states JP=12.

      To eliminate the contributions from unwanted states, JP=32+ and JP=12, a technique involving the linear contributions of different Lorentz structures is employed (for more details about this approach, refer to [17]).

      Following the standard procedure, we insert the total set of baryons with JP=32 into the correlation function along with the corresponding pseudoscalar mesons. Then, we obtain

      Πμν(p,q)=i=±0|ημ|32i(p)m2ip232i(p)P(q)|O(p)m2Pq2×0|Jν(x)|P(q),

      (3)

      where summation is over positive and negative states, and mP is the mass of the corresponding pseudoscalar meson P with momentum q. The matrix elements in the above equation are defined as

      0|ημ|32+(p)=λ+uμ(p),0|ημ|32(p)=λγ5uμ(p),32+(p)P(q)|O(p)=g+ˉuα(p)u(p)qα,32(p)P(q)|O(p)=gˉuα(p)γ5u(p)qα,0|Jν|P(q)=ifPqν,

      (4)

      where λ± are the residues of the related 32± baryons, g± represents the coupling constants of the JP=32± baryons with the octet baryons and pseudoscalar mesons, fP is the decay constant of the pseudoscalar meson and q denotes its 4-momentum, and uμ(p) and u(p) are the Rarita-Schwinger and Dirac spinors, respectively. Performing summation over the spins of the Rarita-Schwinger spinors using the formula

      suμ(p,s)ˉuα(p,s)=(p+m)[gμα13γμγν2pμpα3m2+pμγαpαγμ3m],

      (5)

      and using Eqs. (3) and (4), we can obtain an expression for the correlation function from the hadronic part. It should be reminded that the interpolating current interacts not only with spin 32 states, but also with spin 12 states.

      Using the condition γμημ=0, it can easily be shown that

      0|ημ|12(p)[αγμβpμ]u(p).

      (6)

      It follows from this equation that any structure containing γμ or pμ is "contaminated" by the contributions of spin 12-states. Hence, to remove the contributions of spin 12-states, such structures are all discarded.

      Another problem is all Dirac structures not being independent of each other. To overcome this issue, Dirac structures must be arranged in a specific order. In this study, we choose the ordering γμpqγν.

      Keeping this in mind, and using Eqs. (3), (4), and (5), we obtain the correlation function from the phenomenological part as follows:

      Πμν=λ+g+(q+m++mO)qμqνfP(m2+p2)(m2Pq2)u(p)+λg(q+mmO)qμqνfP(m2p2)(m2Pq2)u(p)+...,

      (7)

      where mO is the mass of the relevant octet baryon, and m+(m) is the mass of the spin-32 positive (negative) parity baryon. Here, ... indicates the contributions of the excited states and continuum.

      As a final step, we must eliminate the contributions of JP=32+ states. For this purpose, the linear combinations of the invariant functions corresponding to different Lorentz structures are considered.

      We now turn our attention to the calculation of the correlation function using operator product expansion (OPE) in the deep Euclidean region for the variables p2=(pq)2 and q20. To calculate OPE, the explicit forms of the interpolating current are placed in the correlator, and possible contractions are performed between quark fields using Wick's theorem. As an example, for the correlation function of Σ0(3/2)NK, we obtain

      Πμν=23d4xeiqxϵabc(Cγμ)αβ(γνγ5)ρσ×{0|uaα(0)ubσ(x)dcβ(0)|NSγρ(x)+0|ucγ(0)ubσ(x)dcα(0)|NSβρ(x)+0|uaβ(0)ubσ(x)dcγ(x)|NSαρ(x)},

      (8)

      where S(x) is the strange quark propagator. From this expression, it follows that the OPE results are obtained via convolution of the quark propagator to the sum of the nucleon DAs, obtained from the ϵabc0|uaα(0)ubβ(x)dcγ(0)|N matrix element. A diagrammatic description of Eq. (8) is given in Fig. 1. Once we use the explicit expressions of the quark propagators and the definition of the DAs of octet baryons, the following master integral appears in the coefficients of different Lorentz structures:

      Figure 1.  Diagrammatic representation of the correlation function. The wavy lines denote the external currents, solid lines correspond to the quark fields, and shaded regions correspond to the DAs of the nucleon.

      In,k=duuk[m2(puq)2]n;n=1,2,3.

      For the calculation of the double spectral densities, it is sufficient to find the double spectral representations of the master integrals. The details of the spectral density calculations for the n=1 case are presented in Appendix A. The cases of n=2 and n=3 are calculated in a similar manner.

      The invariant amplitudes are related to the spectral densities via the double dispersion relation as follows:

      Π[(pq)2,q2]=ds1ds2ρ(s1,s2)[s1(pq)2](s2q2)+

      (9)

      The spectral density can be obtained from Π[(pq)2,q2] by applying two subsequent double Borel transformations (for more details of the calculation, see Appendix A.)

      Matching the OPE results with the double dispersion relations for the relevant Lorentz structures of the hadrons, applying the quark-hadron duality ansatz, and performing double Borel transformation with respect to the variables (pq)2 and q2, we obtain the LCSRs for the relevant coupling constants whose explicit form can be written as

      g=em2/M21em2P/M22fPλ(m++m)1π2s00ds1×min(s0,t2(s1))t1(s1)ds2es1/M21es2/M22Ims1Ims2×{Π1(m+mO)+Π2},

      (10)

      where Π1 and Π2 are the invariant functions of the Lorentz structures qqμqν and qμqν, respectively, and

      t1,2=s1+m2O2mOs1m2,

      where m is the corresponding mass of light quarks. Here, s0 is the continuum threshold in the pseudoscalar meson channel. The continuum threshold s0 is chosen as a mass square of the first radial excitation of the corresponding pseudoscalar meson. Finally, note that in the mO0 limit, the applied method must be modified (for more details, see [18,19]).

    III.   NUMERICAL ANALYSIS
    • This section is devoted to the numerical analysis of the coupling constants derived in the previous section within the LCSRs. The main nonperturbative input of the considered LCSRs is the DAs of the octet baryons, namely, N, Σ, and Ξ. The explicit expressions of the relevant DAs are obtained in [2023]. The DAs contain the normalization constants f, λ1 , and λ2 , which are determined from the analysis of mass sum rules as well as lattice QCD [24, 25]. The normalization constant of the leading twist f, (for N, Σ, and Ξ baryons) is defined via the matrix element of the local current (all quark fields are at the same point).

      ϵabc0|(qa1(0)Cnqb2(0))γ5nqc3(0)|O(p)=f(pn)nu(p).

      (11)

      Moreover, the DAs of higher twist contributions involve two additional normalization constants, λ1 and λ2 , which are defined as the matrix elements of local three quark twist-four operators,

      ϵabc0|(qa1(0)Cγμqb2(0))γ5γμqc3(0)|O(p)=λ1mOu(p),ϵabc0|(qa1(0)Cσμνqb2(0))γ5σμνqc3(0)|O(p)=λ2mOu(p),

      (12)

      where n is the light-like vector, and u(p) is the Dirac bispinor.

      The normalization constants f, λ1, and λ2 for the Λ baryon can be obtained from Eqs. (11) and (12) via the following replacements:

      CnCγ5nγ5nnfor f

      (13)

      CγμCγ5γμγ5γμγμfor  λ1

      (14)

      CσμνCγ5γ5σμν1for   λ2

      (15)

      In our analysis, we use the parameter values obtained from lattice QCD that are presented in Table 2 for completeness. The masses of the SU(3) partners of Ω(2012) are obtained in [16] and presented below.

      fλ1λ2
      N3.5444.993.4
      Σ5.3146.185.2
      Ξ6.1149.899.5
      Λ4.8742.298.9

      Table 2.  Numerical values of the parameters f,λ1 , and λ2, given in units of 103GeV2.

      m={1700±90MeVforΔ,1805±100MeVforΣ(3/2),1910±110MeVforΞ(3/2),2012.4±0.9MeVforΩ[26].

      These mass values are used in our numerical analysis. For the masses of the ground state baryons, we adapt values from the PDG [26]. In addition, the value of the quark condensate is taken as ˉqq=(246+2819MeV)3 [17] and ˉss=0.8ˉqq [27].

      The residues of the negative parity JP=32 baryons are related to the residues of the radial excitations of the decuplet baryons as follows:

      λ=λradmm+m+m+.

      The residues of the radial excitations of the decuplet baryons are calculated in [2]. Using these results, we can easily determine the residues of the JP=32 baryons.

      The working regions of the Borel mass parameters and continuum thresholds, s0 and s0, used in the numerical analysis are presented in Table 3. Determination of the working regions of the Borel parameters is based on the criteria that both power corrections and continuum contributions should be suppressed. Moreover, the continuum threshold s0 is obtained under the condition that the mass of the considered states reproduces the experimental values with an accuracy of approximately 10%.

      Borel mass parameters Continuum threshold Continuum threshold
      M21/GeV2 M22/GeV2 s0/GeV2 s0/GeV2
      ΔNπ 3÷4 0.25÷0.35 5.0±0.2 1.7
      Σ(3/2)NK 3÷4 0.25÷0.35 5.5±0.2 2.0
      Σ(3/2)Λπ 3÷4 0.42÷0.44 5.5±0.2 1.7
      Σ(3/2)Σπ 3÷4 0.42÷0.44 5.5±0.2 1.7
      Ξ(3/2)ΛK 3÷4 0.45÷0.47 6.0±0.2 2.0
      Ξ(3/2)ΣK 3÷4 0.60÷0.65 6.0±0.2 2.0
      Ξ(3/2)Ξπ 3÷4 0.50÷0.60 6.0±0.2 1.7
      ΩΞK 3÷4 0.55±0.65 6.5±0.2 2.0

      Table 3.  Working regions of the Borel mass parameters and continuum threshold s0.

      Having the values of all input parameters at hand, we can perform the numerical analysis of the relevant coupling constants. As an example, in Fig. 2, we present the dependency of the coupling constant on M21 at fixed values of the continuum thresholds s0, s0 , and M22 for the ΩΞK transition, because this transition has already been discovered. From this figure, we observe that there is good stability of the coupling constant when M21 varies in its working region (Table 3). The obtained coupling constants are presented in Table 4. The errors in the results for the coupling constants can be attributed to the uncertainties in the input parameters as well as errors to the Borel mass parameters M21 and M22 and continuum threshold s0 and s0.

      Figure 2.  (color online) Dependency of the coupling constant of the Ω(2012)ΞK+ transition on the Borel mass parameter M21 at several fixed values of the Borel parameter M22 and the continuum threshold s0=6.5GeV2.

      Decay channelsg/GeV1Γ/MeV (This study)Γ/MeV [16]
      ΔNπ12±371.6×(1.0±0.5)39−58
      ΣNK6±211.1×(1.0±0.6)7−12
      ΣΛπ9±323.7×(1.0±0.6)11−18
      ΣΣπ5±14.5×(1.0±0.4)4−7
      ΞΛK10±215.5×(1.0±0.4)5−10
      ΞΣK6±22.7×(1.0±0.6)2−5
      ΞΞπ7±26.9×(1.0±0.5)5−9
      ΩΞK12±3.57.4×(1.0±0.6)-

      Table 4.  Decay widths of the JP=32 baryons.

      Having determined the coupling constants, we can calculate the decay widths of the corresponding transitions. Using the matrix elements for the considered 3212++pseudoscalar meson transitions, the decay width can be written as

      Γ=g224πm2[(mmO)2m2P]|p|3,

      (16)

      where

      |p|=12mm4+m4O+m4P2m2m2O2m2m2P2m2Om2P,

      is the momentum of octet baryon, and mO and mP are the mass of the octet baryon and pseudoscalar meson, respectively. Using the values of the coupling constants obtained within this study, we estimate the decay widths of the relevant transitions summarized in Table 4. For comparison, we also present the results of the decay widths obtained from the flavor SU(3) analysis [16]. We would like to make the following remark at this point. From the expression of the decay width, it is evidently sensitive to the mass splitting among the SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) and ground state baryons. Thus, for a fair comparison, we use the same mass values as in [16].

      Finally, we compare our results with the values obtained within the framework of the flavor SU(3) method [16]. In this analysis, the coupling constant for ΩΞK is taken as the input parameter, and all the remaining couplings are expressed in terms of this coupling using SU(3) symmetry relations. Using the experimental value of the decay width ΩΞK, we can determine the coupling constant of this transition via Eq. (16), and hence all the other coupling constants can be determined. When we compare our results on the coupling constants and decay widths of the considered decays with those obtained within the flavor SU(3) analysis, we find that they are compatible within the uncertainties of the the model predictions. Small deviations in the results can be attributed to the SU(3) violation effects and uncertainties of the input parameters of the theory. Furthermore, our prediction of the decay width for ΩΞK is compatible with those observed by the BELLE Collaboration within the uncertainties [1]. Moreover, note that the coupling constant, and hence the decay width of ΩΞK, within LCSRs method was calculated using the DAs of pseudoscalar mesons in [3]. However, in this study, we recalculate these quantities within the same framework using the DAs of the Ξ baryon. In this method, the calculations of the theoretical part of the sum rules can be achieved using only one quark propagator; however, in [3], two quark propagators were required, making the calculations difficult because each quark propagator contains many terms. Another advantage of the present method lies in dealing with the contributions of baryons with different parities, especially when mass splittings are small. In this method, no pollution arise due to negative parity baryons. However, with the methods used in [3], the problem of the separation of the contributions of positive baryons remains unsolved. Another difference between the two methods is that in this study, we consider both Borel mass parameters M21 and M22 but in [3], M21=M22 was considered. The uncertainties of the parameters entering the DAs of baryons are larger than those of meson DAs. Once the errors are minimized in the determination of these parameters, more precise results can be obtained. When we compare our results on the coupling constant for ΩΞK, we find that our result is consistent with that in [3] within the uncertainties.

    IV.   CONCLUSION
    • In conclusion, we employ the LCSR method to compute the strong coupling constants and decay widths for the SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) baryon in 3212++pseudoscalar meson transitions. The "contamination" caused by the JP=32+ baryons are eliminated by considering the linear combinations of the sum rules obtained from different Lorentz structures. By comparing our decay width results with the findings of [16], we ascertain the compatibility of our decay width predictions with the outcomes of the flavor SU(3) symmetry analysis. The small discrepancy between the predictions of the two methods may be attributed to the SU(3) violation effects. Moreover, our estimated decay width for the ΩΞK transition is also compatible with the measurement of the BELLE Collaboration within the uncertainty limits. In addition, our result on the coupling constant for ΩΞK calculated using the DAs of Ξ is consistent with the prediction in [3], where the DAs of pseudoscalar mesons are used.

      Our results on the branching ratios can provide useful hints about the nature of the SU(3) partners of the Ω(2012) baryon.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • We are grateful to Y. M. Wang for discussions on numerical analysis. We also thank A. Ozpineci for useful remarks.

    APPENDIX A: DERIVATION OF THE SPECTRAL DENSITY
    • Here, we provide the detailed derivation of the spectral density (see also [28]).

      After applying the double Borel transformation over the variables p2 and q2 to Eq. (9), we obtain

      ΠB1(M21,M22)=ds1ds2es1/M21s2/M22ρ(s1,s2).

      (A1)

      Before implementing the second double Borel transformation, we introduce the new variables σ1=1M2i. The second Borel transformation can be performed over the new Borel parameter τi using the relation

      Bτesσ=δ(1τs).

      (A2)

      As a result, we have

      Bτ1Bτ2ΠB1(M21,M22)=ρ(1τ1,1τ2).

      (A3)

      Hence, the double spectral density can be obtained as follows:

      ρ(s1,s2)=B1s1(σ1)B1s2(σ2)ΠB(1σ1,1σ2).

      Let us now focus on the double spectral density for the n=1 case. Using

      (puq)2=u(pq)2ˉuq2+uˉum2O,

      where ˉu=1u, I1,k can be written as

      I1,k=duuk[m2u(pq)2ˉuq2+ˉuum2O]=duukD,

      where m is the corresponding quark mass. Using the Schwinger representation for the denominator and performing the first double Borel transformation over the variables (pq)2 and q2, we obtain

      I1,k=σk2(σ1+σ2)k+1exp[m2Oσ1σ2σ1+σ2m2(σ1+σ2)],=σk2(σ1+σ2)k+1exp[m2Oσ21+σ222(σ1+σ2)(m2+m2O2)(σ1+σ2)],

      where σi=1M2i. To perform the second double Borel transformation, we use the relation

      σ1+σ22π+dxiexp[σ1+σ22x2iσimOxi]=exp[m2Oσ2i2(σ1+σ2)].

      Then, we obtain

      IB1,k=12π+dx1+dx2σk2(σ1+σ2)kexp[σ1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222)σ2(m2+(mO+x2)2+x212)]=12π1Γ(k)+dx1+dx20dttk1σk2exp[σ1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222+t)σ2(m2+(mO+x2)2+x212+t)]=12π1Γ(k)+dx1+dx20dttk1exp[σ1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222+t)]×(t)kexp[σ2(m2+(mO+x2)2+x212+t)].

      After performing the second Borel transformation, we obtain the the spectral density corresponding to I1,k :

      ρ1,k(s1,s2)=12π1Γ(k)(s2)k+dx1+dx20dttk1δ[s1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222+t)]×δ[s2(m2+(mO+x2)2+x212+t)]=12π1Γ(k)(s2)k+dx1+dx20dttk1δ[s1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222+t)]×δ[s2(m2+(mO+x2)2+x212+t)].

      Using two Dirac delta functions, we can easily perform integrals over t and x2 :

      ρ1,k(s1,s2)=12πΓ(k)mO(s2)k+dx1[s1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222)]k1Θ[s1(m2+(mO+x1)2+x222)],

      where

      x2=s2s1mO+x1,

      and Θ(x) is the Heaviside step function, which restricts the integral over x1 between the limits y±(s1,s2) , where

      y±(s1,s2)=m2O+s1s2±Δ2mO,

      and

      Δ=m4O(s1s2)2+2m2O(2m2+s1+s2).

      As a result of the above summarized calculations, the spectral density can take the following form:

      ρ1,k(s1,s2)=12π1Γ(k)1mO(s2)ky+ydx[(y+x)(xy)]kΘ(Δ).

      To evaluate the x integral, we introduce a new variable through the relation

      x=(y+y)y+y,

      so that the spectral density can be written as

      ρ1,k(s1,s2)=12πΓ(k)Γ(2k)1m2kO(s2)k[Δk12Θ(Δ)].

      (A4)

      The double spectral densities for I2,k and I3,k can be calculated using the following relations:

      I2,k=(m2)I1,k,and,

      I3,k=12(m2)2I1,k,

      (see also [17] for the calculation of the spectral densities I2,k and I3,k).

Reference (28)

目录

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return