1: \documentclass[prd,showpacs]{revtex4}
2: %\documentclass{revtex4}
3: \usepackage{epsfig}
4: \usepackage{amsmath}
5: \usepackage{amssymb}
6: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{2.0}
7: \textheight24cm
8: \textwidth16.5cm
9: \oddsidemargin -.2in
10: \evensidemargin -0.2in
11: \topmargin -33pt
12:
13: \begin{document}
14: \title{Study of W-exchange Mode $D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0$}\thanks{This
15: work is partly supported by National Science Foundation of China
16: under contract No. 10475085}
17: \author{
18: Dong-Sheng Du, Ying Li\footnote{liying@mail.ihep.ac.cn}, Cai-Dian L\"u} \affiliation
19: {\it \small Institute of High
20: Energy Physics, P.O.Box 918(4), Beijing 100049, China}
21: \begin{abstract}
22: We calculate the branching ratio of rare decay $D^0 \to \phi
23: \overline K^0$ using the perturbative QCD factorization approach based on $k_T$
24: factorization. Our result shows this branching ratio is $(8.7
25: \pm1.4)\times 10^{-3}$, which is consistent with experimental
26: data. We hope the CLEO-C and BES-III can measure it more
27: accurately, which will help us understand QCD dynamics and
28: $D$ meson weak decays.
29: \end{abstract}
30:
31: \pacs{13.20.Ft, 12.38.Bx, 14.40.Lb}
32: \maketitle
33:
34: The precise estimation of the branching ratio for the hadronic $D$
35: decays is very important both in theoretical side and experimental
36: side. As a rare decay, $D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0$ plays an
37: important role in testing QCD dynamics and searching for new
38: physics. In the standard model picture, this decay mode is a pure
39: annihilation type decay, also called $W$-exchange mode. It has
40: been discussed with a large branching ratio to explain the big
41: difference of lifetime between $D^0$ and $D^+$ \cite{bigi}. In the
42: $80$'s of last century, this decay's branching ratio has been
43: measured in CLEO \cite{benek}. With the development of experiments,
44: this branching ratio is confirmed as \cite{pdg}:
45: \begin{gather}
46: \mathrm{Br}(D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0) = (9.4 \pm{1.1})\times
47: 10^{-3}.\label{exp}
48: \end{gather}
49: To our knowledge, this decay mode is never calculated quantitatively
50: in QCD. So, it is necessary for us to reanalyze this decay mode
51: seriously.
52:
53: Based on the factorization hypothesis, many $D$ decays have been
54: calculated in naive factorization approach \cite{BSW} and QCD
55: factorization approach \cite{QCDF}. However, Annihilation diagrams
56: can not be calculated easily for its endpoint singularity. It is
57: well known that perturbative QCD (PQCD) factorization approach is
58: successful in calculating two-body $B$ meson decays \cite{pqcd}.
59: The end point singularity can be regulated by Sudakov form factor and
60: threshold resummation through introducing the transverse momentum
61: $k_T$ of valence quarks. Thus, PQCD approach can give converging
62: results and have predictive power. Using this approach, people
63: have calculated many $B$ meson pure annihilation type decays quantificationally, and
64: the results agree with data well \cite{lu:bdsk}.
65:
66:
67: In this paper, we will calculate the $D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0$
68: decay in PQCD approach. In this decay, the $W$ boson exchange
69: induces the four quark operator $\bar s c \to \bar{u}d$, and the
70: $\bar{s}s$ quarks included in $\phi, \overline K^0$ are produced
71: from a gluon. This gluon can attach to any one of the quarks
72: participating in the four-quark operator. In the rest frame of $D$
73: meson, the produced $s$ and $\bar{s}$ quark included in final states
74: have momenta of $\mathcal{O}(P_K/2)$ and $\mathcal{O}(P_\phi/2)$,
75: respectively. Therefore the gluon producing them has momentum $q \sim
76: \mathcal{O}(M_D/2)$, which is nearly $1$ GeV. This hard gluon can be
77: treated perturbatively. Therefore the hard part calculation involves
78: not only the four quark operator but also the hard gluon connecting $s \bar s$
79: quark pair. The factorization here means the six quark hard part
80: calculation factorize from the non-perturbative hadronization
81: characterized by meson light cone wave functions.
82:
83: %\section{Perturbative Calculation}
84: We work at the $D$ meson rest frame for simplicity. In
85: light-cone coordinate system, the momentum of the $D$, $\phi$ and
86: $\overline K^0$ meson can be written as:
87: \begin{eqnarray}
88: P_1=P_D=\frac{M_D}{\sqrt{2}} ~(1, 1, \vec{0}_\perp),
89: P_2=P_{\phi}=\frac{M_D}{\sqrt{2}} ~(1, r^2, \vec{0}_\perp),
90: P_3=P_{\overline K^0}=\frac{M_D}{\sqrt{2}}~ (0, 1-r^2,
91: \vec{0}_\perp),
92: \end{eqnarray}
93: where $r = M_\phi/ M_D $ and we neglect the $\overline K^0$ meson
94: mass $M_{\overline K^0}$ compared with the large $D$ meson mass.
95: Because this decay is $D \to PV$ mode, the transverse polarization
96: of $\phi$ meson gives no contribution. The longitudinal polarization
97: vector of $\phi$ meson is given as:
98: \begin{eqnarray}
99: \epsilon_{2L}=\frac{M_D}{\sqrt{2}M_\phi} ~(1, -r^2,\vec{0}_\perp).
100: \end{eqnarray}
101: Denoting the light (anti-)quark momenta in $D$, $\phi$ and
102: $\overline K^{0}$ mesons as $k_1$, $k_2$, and $k_3$, respectively,
103: we can choose
104: \begin{eqnarray}
105: k_1 = (x_1P_1^+, 0, {\bf k}_{1T}),\ k_2 = (x_2 P_2^+, 0, {\bf
106: k}_{2T}), k_3 = (0, x_3 P_3^-, {\bf k}_{3T}) .
107: \label{eq:momentun2}
108: \end{eqnarray}
109: Then, integrating over $k_1^-$, $k_2^-$, and $k_3^+$, we get the decay
110: amplitude:
111: \begin{multline}
112: \mbox{Amplitude}
113: \sim \int\!\! d x_1 d x_2 d x_3
114: b_1 d b_1 b_2 d b_2 b_3 d b_3 \\
115: \mathrm{Tr} \bigl[ C(t) \Phi_D(x_1,b_1)
116: \Phi_{\phi}(x_2,b_2,\epsilon) \Phi_{K}(x_3, b_3)
117: H(x_i,b_i,\epsilon, t) S_t(x_i)\, e^{-S(t)} \bigr],
118: \label{eq:convolution2}
119: \end{multline}
120: where $b_i$ is the conjugate space coordinate of ${\bf k}_{iT}$, and $t$
121: is the largest energy scale in $H$, as the function in terms of
122: $x_i$ and $b_i$. The large logarithms ($\ln m_W/t$) coming from
123: QCD radiative corrections to four quark operators are included in
124: the Wilson coefficients $C(t)$. The large double logarithms
125: ($\ln^2 x_i$) on the longitudinal direction are summed by the
126: threshold resummation, and they lead to a jet function $S_t(x_i)$
127: which smears the end-point singularities on $x_i$. The last term,
128: $e^{-S(t)}$, contains two kinds of logarithms. One of the large
129: logarithms is due to the renormalization of ultra-violet
130: divergence $\ln tb$, the other is resummation of double logarithm $\ln^2 b$ from
131: the overlap of collinear and soft gluon corrections. This Sudakov
132: form factor suppresses the soft dynamics effectively. Thus it
133: makes perturbative calculation of the hard part $H$ reliable.
134: $\Phi_M$ is the wave function which describes the inner
135: information of meson $M$.
136:
137:
138: For this decay, the relevant weak Hamiltonian is
139: \cite{Buchalla:1996vs}:
140: \begin{equation}
141: H_\mathrm{eff} = \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}V_{cs}V_{ud}^* \left[
142: C_1(\mu) O_1(\mu) + C_2(\mu) O_2(\mu) \right],\label{hami}
143: \end{equation}
144: where $C_{i}(\mu)(i=1,2)$ is the QCD corrected Wilson coefficient at the
145: renormalization scale $\mu$ and the four quark operators $O_{1}$ and $O_{2}$ are
146: \begin{eqnarray}
147: O_1 = (\bar{s}_id_i)_{V-A}(\bar{u}_jc_j)_{V-A},
148: O_2 = (\bar{s}_ic_i)_{V-A} (\bar{u}_jd_j)_{V-A}.
149: \end{eqnarray}
150: The four lowest order Feynman diagrams of $D^0 \to \phi \overline
151: K^0$ in PQCD approach are drawn in FIG.\ref{fig:diagrams1} according
152: to this effective Hamiltonian.
153:
154:
155: %=========================================================
156: \begin{figure}[htb]
157: %\vspace{-0.5cm}
158: \begin{center}
159: \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{fig.eps}
160: \caption{Leading order Feynman diagrams of $D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0$}
161: \label{fig:diagrams1}
162: \end{center}
163: \end{figure}
164: %=========================================================
165:
166:
167: By calculating the hard part $H$ at the first order of $\alpha_s$,
168: we get the following analytic formulas. With the meson wave
169: functions, the amplitude for the factorizable annihilation
170: diagrams in Fig.\ref{fig:diagrams1}(a) and (b) results in $F_a$
171: as:
172: \begin{widetext}
173: \begin{multline}
174: F_a= -16\pi C_F M_D^2 \int_0^1 \!\! dx_2 dx_3
175: \int_0^\infty \!\! b_2 db_2\, b_3 db_3\times\Bigl[ E_{f}(t_a^1)
176: h_1(x_2,x_3,b_2,b_3)\bigl\{ (x_3-1)
177: \phi_\phi(x_2)\phi_K^A(x_3)\\
178: -2r
179: (x_3-2)r_K \phi_\phi^s(x_2)\phi_K^P(x_3)
180: -2x_3r r_K \phi_\phi^s(x_2)\phi_K^T(x_3)\bigr\} -\bigl\{ (x_2-1)\phi_\phi(x_2)\phi_K^A(x_3) \\
181: + 2x_2r
182: r_K\phi_\phi(x_2) \phi_K^P(x_3)
183: - 2r(x_2-2) r_K\phi_\phi(x_2)
184: \phi_K^P(x_3) \bigr\} E_{f}(t_a^2) h_2(x_2,x_3,b_2,b_3) \Bigr].
185: \label{eq:Fa}
186: \end{multline}
187: \end{widetext}
188: In the function, $C_F = 4/3$ is the group factor of
189: $\mathrm{SU}(3)_c$, and $r_K = m_{0K}/M_D$, with $m_{0K} =
190: m_K^2/m_s$ ($m_s$ is the $s$ quark current mass). The functions
191: $E_{f}$ is :
192: \begin{equation}
193: E_{f}(t) = (C_1(t)+ C_2(t)/3)\alpha_s(t)\ e^{-S_\phi(t)-S_K(t)}.
194: \end{equation}
195: The hard scale $t$'s in the amplitudes are taken as the largest
196: energy scale in the hard part $H$ in order to kill the large
197: logarithmic radiative corrections:
198: \begin{eqnarray}
199: t_a^1 = \mathrm{max}(M_D \sqrt{1-x_3+x_3r^2},\frac{1}{b_2},\frac{1}{b_3}),
200: t_a^2 = \mathrm{max}(M_D \sqrt{1-x_2},\frac{1}{b_2},\frac{1}{b_3}).
201: \end{eqnarray}
202: The functions $h_i(i=1,2)$ in the decay amplitudes consist of two
203: parts: one is the jet function $S_t(x_i)$ derived by the threshold
204: resummation, the other is the Fourier transformation of the propagator of virtual quark and gluon.
205: They are given as:
206: \begin{widetext}
207: \begin{align}
208: & h_1(x_2,x_3,b_2,b_3) = S_t(1-x_3)\left( \frac{\pi i}{2}\right)^2
209: H_0^{(1)}(M_D\sqrt{(1-x_2)(1-x_3+x_3r^2)}\, b_2) \nonumber \\
210: &\times \left\{ H_0^{(1)}(M_D\sqrt{1-x_3+x_3r^2}\, b_2)
211: J_0(M_D\sqrt{1-x_3+x_3r^2}\, b_3) \theta(b_2 - b_3) + (b_2
212: \leftrightarrow b_3 ) \right\}, \label{eq:propagator1}
213: \end{align}
214: \begin{align}
215: & h_2(x_2,x_3,b_2,b_3) = S_t(1-x_2)\left( \frac{\pi i}{2}\right)^2
216: H_0^{(1)}(M_D\sqrt{(1-x_2)(1-x_3+x_3r^2)}\, b_2) \nonumber \\
217: &\times \left\{ H_0^{(1)}(M_D\sqrt{1-x_2}\, b_2)
218: J_0(M_D\sqrt{1-x_2}\, b_3) \theta(b_2 - b_3) + (b_2
219: \leftrightarrow b_3 ) \right\}.
220: \end{align}
221: The amplitude for the nonfactorizable annihilation diagrams in
222: Fig.\ref{fig:diagrams1}(c) and (d) results in
223: \begin{multline}
224: M_a = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2N_c}} 64\pi C_F M_D^2 \int_0^1 \!\! dx_1
225: dx_2 dx_3
226: \int_0^\infty \!\! b_1 db_1\, b_2 db_2\
227: \phi_D(x_1,b_1) \\
228: \times \Bigl[ \bigl\{\left(x_3-1 \right)
229: \phi_\phi(x_2)\phi_K^A(x_3)
230: - r \left(x_2+x_3-2 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^s(x_2)\phi_K^P(x_3)
231: - r \left(x_2-x_3 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^t(x_2)\phi_K^P(x_3)\\
232: - r \left(x_2+x_3-2 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^t(x_2)\phi_K^T(x_3)
233: - r \left(x_2-x_3 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^s(x_2)\phi_K^T(x_3)
234: \bigr\}
235: E_{m}(t_{m}^1) h_a^{(1)}(x_1, x_2,x_3,b_1,b_2) \\
236: - \bigl\{\left(x_2-1 \right) \phi_\phi(x_2)\phi_K^A(x_3)
237: - r \left(x_2+x_3-4 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^s(x_2)\phi_K^P(x_3)
238: - r \left(-x_2+x_3 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^t(x_2)\phi_K^P(x_3)\\
239: - r \left(x_2-x_3 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^s(x_2)\phi_K^T(x_3)
240: + r \left(x_2+x_3 \right) r_K \phi_\phi^t(x_2)\phi_K^T(x_3)
241: \bigr\} E_{m}(t_{m}^2) h_a^{(2)}(x_1, x_2,x_3,b_1,b_2) \Bigr],
242: \label{eq:Ma1}
243: \end{multline}
244: where $x_1$ dependence in the numerators of the hard part are
245: neglected by the assumption $x_1 \ll x_2, x_3$. In the above
246: Equation, some functions are defined as:
247: \begin{eqnarray}
248: E_{m}(t)& =& C_2(t) \alpha_s(t)\, e^{-S_D(t)-S_\phi(t)-S_K(t)}; \\
249: t_{m}^j &= &\mathrm{max}(M_D \sqrt{|F^2_{(j)}|}, M_D
250: \sqrt{(1-x_2)(1-x_3+x_3r^2)}, \frac{1}{b_1},\frac{1}{b_2});
251: \end{eqnarray}
252: \begin{align}
253: & h^{(j)}_a(x_1,x_2,x_3,b_1,b_2) = \nonumber \\
254: & \biggl\{ \frac{\pi i}{2}
255: \mathrm{H}_0^{(1)}(M_D\sqrt{(1-x_2)(1-x_3+x_3r^2)}\, b_1)
256: \mathrm{J}_0(M_D\sqrt{(1-x_2)(1-x_3+x_3r^2)}\, b_2) \theta(b_1-b_2)
257: \nonumber \\
258: & \qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad + (b_1 \leftrightarrow b_2) \biggr\}
259: \times\left(
260: \begin{matrix}
261: \mathrm{K}_0(M_D F_{(j)} b_1), & \text{for}\quad F^2_{(j)}>0 \\
262: \frac{\pi i}{2} \mathrm{H}_0^{(1)}(M_D\sqrt{|F^2_{(j)}|}\ b_1), &
263: \text{for}\quad F^2_{(j)}<0
264: \end{matrix}\right),
265: \label{eq:propagator2}
266: \end{align}
267: \end{widetext}
268: with:
269: \begin{eqnarray}
270: F^2_{(1)}= (-x_1+x_2+1)(1-x_3+x_3r^2),
271: F^2_{(2)} =x_3(x_2-x_1)(1-r^2)-1.
272: \end{eqnarray}
273: The total decay amplitude for $D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0$ decay
274: is given as $ A = f_D F_a + M_a $. The decay width is then
275: \begin{equation}
276: \Gamma(D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0) = \frac{G_F^2 M_D^3}{128\pi} (1-r^2)
277: |V_{ud}^*V_{cs} A|^2. \label{eq:neut_width}
278: \end{equation}
279:
280: %=========================================================
281: \begin{figure}[thb]
282: %\vspace{-0.5cm}
283: \begin{center}
284: \includegraphics[scale=0.55]{fig3.eps}
285: \caption{The $D$ meson distribution amplitude} \label{fig2}
286: \end{center}
287: \end{figure}
288: %=========================================================
289:
290: For numerical analysis, we use the following input parameters
291: \cite{pdg}:
292: \begin{gather}
293: f_D = 230 \mbox{ MeV},~f_K = 160 \mbox{ MeV},~ f_{\phi} = 241 \mbox{
294: MeV},\nonumber
295: m_{0K} =1.7 \mbox{ GeV}, \nonumber\\ |V_{ud}|=0.9734, ~|V_{cs}|=0.974,
296: \tau_{D^0}=4.1\times 10^{-13}\mbox{s},~ f_{\phi}^T = 220 \mbox{MeV}.
297: \label{eq:shapewv}
298: \end{gather}
299: The branching ratio obtained from the analytic formulas may be
300: sensitive to many parameters especially those in the meson wave
301: functions. The light $\phi$ and $K$ mesons' distribution amplitudes
302: up to twist-3 have been used for many times in $B$ decays \cite{pqcd},
303: and we don't list them here. The meson ($\phi$, $K$) wave functions
304: are well constrained by hadronic $B$ decays experiments.
305:
306: However, the heavy
307: meson wave functions are still in discussion especially for $D$
308: meson. In this work, the $D$ meson distribution amplitude we used
309: has only one parameter $\omega_D$, which is similar to $B$ meson
310: \cite{pqcd}:
311: \begin{equation}
312: \phi_D(x,b) = N x^2(1-x)^2 \exp \left[ -\frac{M_D^2\ x^2}{2
313: \omega_D^2} -\frac{1}{2} (\omega_D b)^2 \right],
314: \end{equation}
315: where $N$ is a normalization factor. For $B$ meson, the peak appears
316: at $x=0.1$, because $b$ quark is much heavier than the light $d$
317: quark. For $D$ meson, the ratio of heavy $(c)$ and light quark $(u)$
318: mass is rather smaller than that of $B$ meson. So we adjust the
319: parameter $\omega_D = 0.5 \mbox{ GeV}$, which makes the distribution amplitude
320: peak at $x=0.3$.
321: The shape of the $D$ meson distribution amplitude is shown in FIG.2.
322: Using this wave function, we can get the form factor of $D \to K $
323: as $F^{D\to K} =0.80$. This result is consistent with the previous
324: calculation $F^{D\to K} = 0.78\pm 0.04$ \cite{formf}. In fact, the
325: heavy meson distribution amplitude can be eventually determined by
326: radiative leptonic $D$ meson decays\cite{song}.
327:
328: Here if we let $\omega_D$ vary
329: from $0.45$ to $0.55$, the branching ratios of $D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0$ decay is:
330: \begin{gather}
331: \mathrm{Br}(D^0 \to \phi \overline K^0) = (8.7 \pm{1.6}) \times
332: 10^{-3} ,
333: \end{gather}
334: which is consistent with the experimental measurement shown in
335: eq.(\ref{exp}). From this calculation, we find that the branching
336: ratio becomes large when $\omega_D$ arise. Many other parameters
337: such as Chiral breaking scale $m_{0K}$, CKM matrix elements also
338: have large uncertainties, which will also enlarge the theoretical
339: uncertainties for branching ratios.
340:
341:
342: In general, if a process happens in an energy scale where there are
343: many resonance states, this process must be seriously affected by
344: these resonances. This is a highly non-perturbative strong
345: interaction effect. Near the scale of $D$ meson mass many resonance
346: states exist, which may give large pollution to $D$ decays
347: calculation. So the final states interaction (FSI) may be
348: important. However, we cannot calculate the FSI's contribution from
349: the first principle. Although many people have discussed final
350: states interaction in $D$ decay \cite{FSI}, there is large
351: uncertainty in the calculation because they are usually model
352: dependent. In our PQCD calculation we factorize the non-perturbative
353: effects in meson wave functions, but neglect the soft FSI effect.
354: Our numerical result is consistent with the experimental data well.
355: It is a hint, that the contribution from soft FSI may not play an
356: important role in this decay. We think the CLEO-C and BES can
357: measure this $W$-change channel more accurately, which will afford
358: help for us to understand the dynamics of $D$ decay. And the results
359: also help us determine the $D$ meson distribution amplitude. Since
360: there is only tree operators contributing to this decay (only one
361: kind of weak phase), there is no direct $CP$ violation in the standard
362: model. Any non-zero measurement of direct $CP$ in this decay will be a
363: signal of new physics.
364:
365: %\section{Summary}
366: In a summary, we calculate the branching ratio of $D^0 \to \phi
367: \overline K^0$ in the perturbative QCD factorization approach
368: without considering final states interaction. Our result indicates
369: this branching ratio is very large comparing with other pure
370: annihilation decay channels, because there is no Cabibbo
371: suppression. This branching ratio is about $8.7 \times 10^{-3}$, and
372: has been measured by CLEO. We hope the CLEO-C and BES-III can
373: measure it more accurately, which will help us test QCD dynamics.
374:
375: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
376:
377: \bibitem{bigi} I. Bigi and M. Fukugita 1980 {\it Phys. Lett. B} {\bf 91} 121.
378:
379: \bibitem{benek} C. Benek, {\sl{et.al}} 1986 {\it Phys. Rev. Lett} {\bf 56} 1893.
380:
381: \bibitem{pdg} Particle Data Group, S. Eidelman, {\sl{et al.}} 2004 {\it Phys. Lett. B} {\bf 592} 1.
382:
383: \bibitem{BSW}
384: M. Bauer and B. Stech 1985 {\it Phys. Lett. B} {\bf 152} 380;
385: M. Bauer, B. Stech and M. Wirbel 1987 {\it Z. Phys. C} {\bf 34} 103.
386:
387: \bibitem{QCDF}
388: GONG H.-J, SUN J.-F and DU D.-S 2002 {\it HEP and NP} {\bf26} 665;
389: LAI J.-H and YANG K.-C 2005 {\it Phys.Rev. D} {\bf 72} 096001.
390:
391: \bibitem{pqcd}
392: Y.-Y. Keum, LI H.-N and A. I. Sanda 2001 {\it Phys. Rev. D} {\bf63} 054008;
393: L\"U C.-D, K. Ukai and YANG M.-Z 2001 {\it Phys. Rev. D} {\bf 63} 074009.
394:
395: \bibitem{lu:bdsk}
396: L\"U C.-D. and K. Ukai 2003 {\it Eure.Phy.J.C} {\bf28}, 305 (2003);
397: LI Y and L\"U C.-D, 2003 {\it J. Phys. G} {\bf29} 2115-2124;
398: L\"U C.-D 2002 {\it Eure.Phy.J.C} {\bf24} 121.
399:
400: \bibitem{Buchalla:1996vs} G. Buchalla, A. J. Buras and
401: M. E. Lautenbacher, 1996 {\it Rev. Mod. Phys} {\bf 68} 1125.
402:
403: \bibitem{formf}
404: S. V. Semenov 2003 {\it Yad. Fiz} {\bf 66} [2003 {\it Phys. At. Nucl} {\bf 66}, 526 ].
405:
406:
407: \bibitem{song} L\"U C-D and SONG G-L 2003 {\it Phys. Lett.B} {\bf 562} 75.
408:
409: \bibitem{FSI} H. J. Lipkin 1980 {\it Phys. Rev. Lett} {\bf 44} 710;
410: J. F.Donoghue, B. R.Holstein 1980 {\it Phys. Rev. D} {\bf 21} 1334;
411: M.Ablikim, DU D.-S and YANG M.-Z 2002 {\it Phys. Lett. B} {\bf 536} 34.
412:
413: \end{thebibliography}
414: \end{document}
415: