fig:fey-c\], and the pure annihilation topologies of Fig.\[fig:fey-a\], respectively. And each category could be further divided into two classes, i.e., the decay amplitudes of the classes “I” and “II” are proportional to the CKM factors of $V_{cb}\,V_{ud}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ $A{\lambda}^{2}$ and $V_{cb}\,V_{us}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ $A{\lambda}^{3}$, respectively. There are many hierarchical relations among the branching ratios, such as, $${\cal B}r(\text{class T-I}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class C-I}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class A-I})
   \label{r-01-01},$$ $${\cal B}r(\text{class T-II}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class C-II}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class A-II})
   \label{r-01-02},$$ $${\cal B}r(\text{class X-I}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class X-II}), \quad
   \text{for X\,=\,T,\,C,\,A}
   \label{r-01-03}.$$ These categories and relations also happen to hold true for the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DV$ decays.

For the “T” and “C” types of the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ decays, the annihilation contributions have a negligible impact on the branching ratios, and they are strongly suppressed relative to the emission contributions, as is stated by the QCDF approach [@npb591.313].

For the “T” types of the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ decays, the factorizable contributions from the emission topologies to the branching ratios are dominant over other contributions. However, for the “C” types of the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ decays, the nonfactorizable contributions to the branching ratios become very important, and sometimes even dominant.

\(2) With the law of conservation of angular momentum, three partial wave amplitudes, including the $s$-, $p$-, and $d$-wave amplitudes
fig: fey - c\ ], and the pure annihilation topologies of Fig.\[fig: fey - a\ ], respectively. And each category could be further separate into two class, i.e., the decay amplitudes of the classes “ I ” and “ II ” are proportional to the CKM factors of $ V_{cb}\,V_{ud}^{\ast}$ $ { \sim}$ $ A{\lambda}^{2}$ and $ V_{cb}\,V_{us}^{\ast}$ $ { \sim}$ $ A{\lambda}^{3}$, respectively. There be many hierarchical relations among the branching proportion, such as, $ $ { \cal B}r(\text{class T - one }) > 
   { \cal B}r(\text{class C - I }) > 
   { \cal B}r(\text{class A - iodine }) 
    \label{r-01 - 01},$$ $ $ { \cal B}r(\text{class T - II }) > 
   { \cal B}r(\text{class C - II }) > 
   { \cal B}r(\text{class A - II }) 
    \label{r-01 - 02},$$ $ $ { \cal B}r(\text{class X - I }) > 
   { \cal B}r(\text{class X - II }), \quad 
    \text{for X\,=\,T,\,C,\,A } 
    \label{r-01 - 03}.$$ These categories and relation also happen to declare true for the $ \overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ $ { \to}$ $ DV$ decays. 

 For the “ T ” and “ C ” types of the $ \overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ $ { \to}$ $ DM$ decays, the annihilation contributions have a negligible impingement on the branching ratios, and they are strongly suppress relative to the emission contributions, as is stated by the QCDF approach [ @npb591.313 ]. 

 For the “ T ” type of the $ \overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ $ { \to}$ $ DM$ decays, the factorizable contributions from the emission topologies to the branching ratio are dominant over other contributions. However, for the “ C ” types of the $ \overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ $ { \to}$ $ DM$ decays, the nonfactorizable contributions to the branching ratios become very important, and sometimes even dominant. 

 \(2) With the law of conservation of angular momentum, three partial wave amplitudes, including the $ s$-, $ p$-, and $ d$-wave amplitudes
fig:vey-c\], and the pure annihiuation topologigs of Fij.\[fig:fey-z\], respecgively. And each category coupd be fyrther divided into twu classes, i.e., the eecab amplitudes of vge classes “I” zkd “II” ere proportionak to the CNM factors of $E_{cc}\,V_{bd}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ $A{\lambda}^{2}$ and $V_{cb}\,V_{us}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ $W{\lambda}^{3}$, rfspectively. Thgre age mang hierarchical relations among the branchpng ratios, such ax, $${\cal B}r(\text{class T-I}) >
  {\cal B}r(\tfxt{class C-I}) >
  {\cal H}r(\text{class A-I})
   \label{r-01-01},$$ $${\cal C}r(\text{class T-II}) >
  {\cal G}r(\text{class C-II}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{clars A-IN})
   \label{r-01-02},$$ $${\xao B}g(\jext{class X-I}) >
  {\caj B}r(\text{class X-II}), \qudd
   \tect{for X\,=\,T,\,C,\,A}
   \lsben{r-01-03}.$$ Rhese categories and celations also happeg to hold txue for the $\overline{B}_{w}^{\awt}$ ${\to}$ $DV$ gecahw.

Fof tge “T” and “C” ty'es of the $\kverline{B}_{q}^{\awt}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ decays, the agbihilation cohtribueijns have a negligible impact on the bratchjng ratios, and they are strongly suppressed telative tj the emission contributions, as is stated by the XCDF eporocgm [@npc591.313].

Dog the “T” types of the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ decara, uhe factorizable gontributions from tje gmission topolugies ck fhe branching ratils are qominqnt over jthet contributions. However, for the “C” types if the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\adt}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ deeays, tne nomfactorizable contributnons tk the brancjing ratikr become very imoornant, and somtgimes even dominagt.

\(2) With tie lac of conrervstion jf angular momekdum, three partial aave cmplidudes, inclkding the $s$-, $p$-, and $d$-wave amplituvxs
fig:fey-c\], and the pure annihilation topologies of And category could further divided into amplitudes the classes “I” “II” are proportional the CKM factors of $V_{cb}\,V_{ud}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ and $V_{cb}\,V_{us}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ $A{\lambda}^{3}$, respectively. There are many hierarchical relations among the branching such as, $${\cal B}r(\text{class T-I}) > {\cal B}r(\text{class C-I}) > {\cal B}r(\text{class A-I}) $${\cal T-II}) {\cal C-II}) > {\cal B}r(\text{class A-II}) \label{r-01-02},$$ $${\cal B}r(\text{class X-I}) > {\cal B}r(\text{class X-II}), \quad \text{for X\,=\,T,\,C,\,A} These categories and relations also happen to hold for the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ decays. For the “T” and types the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ $DM$ the contributions have a impact on the branching ratios, and they are strongly suppressed relative to the emission contributions, as is by the [@npb591.313]. For “T” of $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ factorizable contributions from the emission topologies ratios are dominant over other contributions. However, for “C” types the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$ decays, the contributions to the branching ratios become very important, sometimes even dominant. \(2) With the law of conservation of angular momentum, three partial wave the $s$-, $p$-, and amplitudes
fig:fey-c\], and the pure annihilaTion topoloGies oF FiG.\[fiG:fEy-a\], rEspeCtively. And each CAtegOry could be further dividEd intO tWO claSSeS, i.e., thE decay aMPlITUdeS oF tHe cLaSSeS “I” and “iI” aRe propoRtional to tHe CkM Factors of $V_{cb}\,v_{Ud}^{\Ast}$ ${\sim}$ $A{\lamBda}^{2}$ And $V_{cb}\,V_{us}^{\ast}$ ${\Sim}$ $a{\lambdA}^{3}$, rEspECtiveLy. THere aRe many HIerarcHical relaTiONs amonG The branCHInG ratIos, such as, $${\cal B}r(\texT{ClASs T-I}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{cLass C-I}) >
  {\CaL b}r(\TEXt{cLasS A-I})
   \label{r-01-01},$$ $${\cAl b}r(\texT{Class T-Ii}) >
  {\CaL b}R(\TexT{Class C-II}) >
  {\cal B}r(\Text{class A-Ii})
   \LabEl{r-01-02},$$ $${\cal b}r(\TexT{Class X-i}) >
  {\cal B}R(\tEXt{cLass X-II}), \quad
   \Text{For X\,=\,T,\,C,\,A}
   \laBel{r-01-03}.$$ ThESe categORies and RelatiOns AlsO hapPEn To HolD tRUe fOR tHe $\oVErlIne{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\To}$ $dV$ DecayS.

For THE “t” And “C” TypEs of The $\ovErline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $dM$ dEcayS, The AnnihIlatiOn coNtRibutIons haVe a neGlIgible impact on tHe brAnching raTioS, aNd tHeY are sTRongly SupPreSsed relAtive to THe eMiSSIOn Contributions, as is sTaTED bY the QCDF ApproaCH [@nPb591.313].

fOr the “T” tyPeS of The $\oVERline{b}_{q}^{\asT}$ ${\To}$ $dM$ decays, The facTOrIzAble conTrIbutioNs FroM thE emisSIon tOpologIes to the BrancHIng ratios are doMInant over otheR CoNTRiBUtioNs. HOwever, for thE “C” tyPEs of The $\oVErLinE{b}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\To}$ $DM$ dEcAYs, THe nonfactorizable coNtRibutiOns to The branching rAtios becomE VERy importAnt, aND sOMetimes even domInant.

\(2) with the law OF conservAtion Of angulaR momentum, THRee partiAl wAve AmpLitUDEs, Including the $s$-, $P$-, ANd $d$-wAvE amplitUdeS
fig:fey-c\], and the pureannihilati on to pol ogi es  ofFig. \[fig:fey-a\], resp ectively. And each cat egory  c o uldb efurth er divi d ed i nto  t wo  cl as s es , i.e .,the dec ay amplitu des  o f the classe s  “ I” and “II ” a re proportio nal  to th eCKM facto rsof $V _{cb}\ , V_{ud} ^{\ast}$${ \ sim}$$ A{\lamb d a }^ {2}$  and $V_{cb}\,V_{ u s} ^ {\ast}$ ${\sim }$ $A{ \l a mb d a }^{ 3}$ , respecti ve ly. T h ere are ma n y hie r archical rela tions among the  branc hi ngr atios,  such  a s , $ ${\cal B}r( \tex t{class T -I}) >   {\cal B}r(\te xt{cla ssC-I }) >  {\ cal  B } r(\ t ex t{c l ass  A-I})
 \l abel{ r-01 - 0 1 } ,$$$${ \cal  B}r( \text{class T -II }) >   { \calB}r(\ text {c lassC-II})  >
 {\ cal B}r(\text{c lass  A-II})
  \ la bel {r -01-0 2 },$$ $ ${\ cal  B}r(\t ext{cla s s X -I } ) >  {\cal B}r(\text{ cl a s sX-II}),\quad \t e xt{for X \, =\, T,\, C , \,A}   \ l ab el{r-01- 03}.$$ Th es e categ or ies an drel ati ons a l so h appento holdtruef or the $\overl i ne{B}_{q}^{\a s t} $ ${ \ to}$  $D V$ decays.
For the“T”a nd  “C ”  type s ofth e  $ \ overline{B}_{q}^{\a st }$ ${\ to}$$DM$ decays,the annihi l a t ion cont ribu t io n s have a negli gible  impact on the bran ching  ratios,  and they a re stron gly  su ppr ess e d  r elative to th e emis si on cont rib utions,  as  is  st ate dby the QC DF appro ac h[@ np b59 1.313 ] .

For t he  “T ”typ es of the $\ overl ine{ B} _{ q }^{ \ast}$$ {\ t o }$ $ DM $deca ys,  t he fa ctor i zab le cont ributions  fr o m th eem issiontopologies to  t he branchi ng  ra tios a r e  dominan t over other contributi o ns. How eve r, fo r th e “C” typ esof the  $\ o verlin e{B}_{ q}^{\ as t}$ $ {\to} $ $D M$de cays, then o nfa ctori za blecontrib utions to the bran c hin g ratios beco mevery i mp ort a nt ,  an ds ome t i mes even domina nt.

\(2)Wi t hthe law of con se rvation  of ang ularm omentum , three p artial wa ve  amp l i tud es, includ ing the$s$-, $p$ - , and $d $-wav e a mplitu de s
fig:fey-c\], and_the pure_annihilation topologies of Fig.\[fig:fey-a\],_respectively. And_each_category could_be_further divided into_two classes, i.e.,_the decay amplitudes of_the classes “I”_and_“II” are proportional to the CKM factors of $V_{cb}\,V_{ud}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$ $A{\lambda}^{2}$ and $V_{cb}\,V_{us}^{\ast}$ ${\sim}$_$A{\lambda}^{3}$,_respectively. There_are_many_hierarchical relations among the branching_ratios, such as, $${\cal B}r(\text{class_T-I}) >
_ {\cal B}r(\text{class C-I}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class_A-I})
_  \label{r-01-01},$$_$${\cal B}r(\text{class T-II}) >
  {\cal B}r(\text{class C-II}) >
_ {\cal B}r(\text{class A-II})
  _\label{r-01-02},$$ $${\cal B}r(\text{class_X-I})_>
_ {\cal B}r(\text{class X-II}),_\quad
   \text{for X\,=\,T,\,C,\,A}
 _ \label{r-01-03}.$$ These categories and relations_also happen to hold true for the_$\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DV$ decays.

For the “T”_and “C” types of the_$\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$_$DM$ decays, the annihilation contributions_have a negligible_impact on_the branching ratios,_and they are strongly suppressed relative_to the emission_contributions, as is stated by the_QCDF_approach [@npb591.313].

For the_“T”_types_of the_$\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$_decays,_the factorizable_contributions_from the emission topologies to the_branching_ratios are dominant over other contributions. However,_for the “C” types_of_the $\overline{B}_{q}^{\ast}$ ${\to}$ $DM$_decays, the nonfactorizable contributions to_the branching ratios become very important,_and sometimes_even dominant.

\(2)_With the law of conservation of angular momentum, three partial wave_amplitudes, including the $s$-, $p$-, and_$d$-wave amplitudes