Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Parke-Taylor varieties

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The Parke-Taylor variety — built from the rational functions behind MHV amplitudes — is a linear coordinate change of the moduli space M̄_{0,n}, and all its relations are combinatorial.

desk verdict A genuinely useful new description of Parke-Taylor varieties, but the proof of the main isomorphism has a sign error and a projective-scaling gap that need fixing before the details are trustworthy. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.09323 v1 pith:66AD3BNE submitted 2025-09-11 math.AG hep-thmath.ACmath.CO

Benjamin Hollering , Dmitrii Pavlov This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGhep-thmath.ACmath.CO MSC 14H1014N2013P1014M25
keywords Parke-TaylorfunctionsMHVamplitudesmodulispaceM_{0n}logcanonicalembeddingGrassmanniantoricidealsPlückerrelationsweakorder
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves that the variety parametrized by the n-point Parke-Taylor functions — the rational functions at the heart of the simplest gluon scattering amplitudes — is the same geometric object as the standard compactification of the moduli space of n marked points on a projective line, just written in a different coordinate system. Concretely, the Parke-Taylor variety PT_n is linearly isomorphic to the log canonical embedding of M̄_{0,n}, and the open part recovers M_{0,n}. The isomorphism is explicit, built from sums over permutations in lower order ideals of the weak order. Because of this identification, the paper obtains a combinatorial description of all polynomial relations among Parke-Taylor functions, up to saturation: they are generated by binomial adjacency relations and explicit lifts of Plücker relations.

What carries the argument

The central identity is a telescoping sum in Plücker coordinates: for any 3 ≤ i ≤ n−1 and permutation σ, the sum over j of p_{σ_j σ_{j+1}}/(p_{σ_j n} p_{σ_{j+1} n}) equals −p_{1 σ_i}/(p_{σ_i n} p_{1 n}). This identity is multiplied into the previous stage of the parametrization at every induction step, translating the forgetful map into the insertion of a new letter into a permutation. The other key object is the toric variety T_n obtained by extending the Parke-Taylor map to the whole Plücker space; its binomial relations are governed by a simple rule: a binomial vanishes exactly when the multisets of adjacencies in its two monomials agree.

What would settle it

Take n = 6, σ = 12345, i = 3, substitute a generic point of Gr(2,6) (e.g., random integers for the Plücker coordinates p_ij) into the identity of Lemma 3.9 and check whether both sides agree; a single failure would invalidate the linear-isomorphism theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the Parke-Taylor variety PT_n — the closure of the image of Gr(2,n) under the map sending a 2-plane to its n-point Parke-Taylor functions — is a closed embedding of M̄_{0,n} into P^{(n-2)!-1} that is linearly isomorphic to the standard log canonical embedding. The linear isomorphism is given by an iterative formula: each coordinate of the log canonical embedding becomes a sum of z_σ over a lower order ideal in the right weak order. This yields a symmetric, single-step construction of the moduli space embedding, in contrast to the iterative forgetful construction that breaks symmetry. The paper then describes the ideal of the Parke-Taylor variety: all non-linear

Load-bearing premise

The telescoping identity in Lemma 3.9 must hold with exactly its stated signs and indices; if this identity is wrong, the iterative construction of the linear isomorphism collapses, and with it the theorem that PT_n equals the log canonical embedding.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • All polynomial relations among Parke-Taylor functions are now described up to saturation: binomial adjacency relations plus explicit lifts of Plücker relations.
  • The Parke-Taylor embedding gives a symmetric, single-step realization of M̄_{0,n} in P^{(n-2)!-1}, potentially simplifying computations in moduli space.
  • Because PT_n is linearly isomorphic to the log canonical embedding, the degree and quadratic generation of its ideal are inherited; the degree is given by a closed formula involving asymmetric multinomial coefficients.
  • If the conjecture on quadratic binomial generators holds for all n ≥ 7, then the ideal of PT_n is quadratically generated by a finite explicit family for every n.
  • The open Parke-Taylor variety is isomorphic to M_{0,n}, so cross-ratios are recovered from ratios of Parke-Taylor functions, connecting amplitude identities to moduli coordinates.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The explicit isomorphism suggests that Parke-Taylor coordinates form a 'democratic' coordinate system on M̄_{0,n} where all marked points play symmetric roles; this could simplify S_n-equivariant constructions on the moduli space.
  • The adjacency-multiset rule for binomial relations provides a purely combinatorial invariant for products of Parke-Taylor functions, which could be used to algorithmically generate new amplitude identities.
  • The connection to statistical ranking models implies that the Parke-Taylor model is a distinct statistical model whose defining equations may have unbounded degree as n grows, unlike the toric models studied previously.
  • The linear isomorphism allows transferring known algebro-geometric results about the log canonical embedding — such as cohomology or Chow ring computations — to the Parke-Taylor embedding, giving scattering amplitude identities a geometric interpretation.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper defines the Parke–Taylor variety PT_n as the Zariski closure of the image of Gr(2,n) under the map sending a line to the vector of Parke–Taylor functions f_σ for permutations fixing 1 and 2. It claims three main results. First, PT°_n is isomorphic to M_{0,n} (Theorem 3.1). Second, PT_n is linearly isomorphic to the log canonical embedding LC_n of \overline{M}_{0,n} into P^{(n-2)!-1}, with an explicit recursive linear map L_n (Theorem 3.7); as a consequence the degree of PT_n equals the multidegree computation of Cavalieri–Gillespie–Monin and I(PT_n) is quadratically generated. Third, the ideal of PT_n is described, up to saturation, by binomial relations of a toric variety T_n (characterized combinatorially via adjacency multisets in Proposition 4.4) plus lifts of Plücker relations; the lifts are given explicitly in Proposition 5.6. A conjectural finite quadratic generating set for the toric ideal is stated (Conjecture 4.12) and verified for n ≤ 9.

Significance. If the main theorems are correct, the paper gives a new, almost symmetric embedding of \overline{M}_{0,n} into the same ambient space as the log canonical embedding, with an explicit combinatorial linear isomorphism. The relation to scattering amplitudes makes the ideal-theoretic description potentially useful beyond algebraic geometry. Strengths of the paper include the clear combinatorial characterization of binomial relations, the explicit degree formula, the use of external Keel–Tevelev and Monin–Rana results, and the availability of Macaulay2 code for the computational verifications. The main theorem is, however, not proved as written: the proof of Theorem 3.7 relies on a sign-invalid identity and does not establish invertibility of L_n. These are load-bearing gaps, though they appear repairable.

major comments (5)
  1. [§3, Corollary 3.10] The displayed identity at the start of the proof of Corollary 3.10 is missing a sign. Inserting n between σ_i and σ_{i+1} replaces the factor p_{σ_i σ_{i+1}} by p_{σ_i n} p_{n σ_{i+1}} = - p_{σ_i n} p_{σ_{i+1} n}, so the correct identity is φ*_{n-1}(z_σ) p_{σ_i σ_{i+1}}/(p_{σ_i n} p_{σ_{i+1} n}) = - φ*_n(z_τ). Consequently the RHS of Corollary 3.10 is also affected; for example, at p=(0,1,2,3,5,7), σ=12534, i=3, one gets φ*_6(Δ_3 z_σ)=1/630 whereas the printed formula gives −1/630. Since the proof of Theorem 3.7 applies this identity to every σ in the inductive definition of L_n, the central linear-isomorphism proof is invalid as written. The statement may be salvageable with the sign tracked explicitly through Eq. (3.1), but this needs to be done.
  2. [§3, proof of Theorem 3.7] The proof does not establish that the linear map L_n is an isomorphism of the ambient projective space. The induction constructs linear forms t_i ↦ sum of z_σ's and shows, modulo the sign issue, that the composed parametrizations agree up to projective scaling. But a linear map between projective spaces can have this property without being invertible; one needs to prove that the matrix of L_n has full rank and that every z_σ appears in the span of the image. The base case n=5 is checked, but the inductive step only states that L_{n-1} is a linear isomorphism, without proving that the new linear forms are linearly independent. Thus the conclusion 'PT_n is linearly isomorphic to LC_n' is not justified.
  3. [§3, Eq. (3.1) and projective scalars] The proof treats the equalities φ*_n(L_n(t)) = Φ*_n(t) as equalities of rational functions, but both parametrizations map to projective spaces and equalities must be up to scalar, with the scalar potentially depending on the point. The n=5 base case gives a concrete example: at p=(0,1,2,3,5), φ*_5(L_5(t_{23})) = 1/10 while Φ_5(t_{23}) = 3; the vectors are proportional by the point-dependent scalar 30. In the induction, the insertion of the factor 1/(p_1−p_n) in Eq. (3.1) is precisely a projective rescaling choice, and this choice is not tracked consistently. As written, the claimed coordinate-wise equalities are not well-defined without fixing and controlling these scalars.
  4. [§5, Lemma 5.5] Lemma 5.5 is stated with the proof omitted ('The proof of this lemma is quite similar to that of Theorem 4.9 so we omit it'). This lemma is used in the proof of Proposition 5.6 to lift Plücker relations from n=6 to all n, so it is load-bearing for the explicit generating set in Theorem 5.1. A nontrivial lifting statement used in a main theorem should be proved, or at least reduced to a precise published statement. Please include a complete proof or a detailed derivation.
  5. [§4, Conjecture 4.12] The promised explicit description of all polynomial relations is conditional: Conjecture 4.12, which asserts that the quadratic binomials B_n generate ker_Z(A_n) for n ≥ 7, is verified only for n = 7, 8, 9. The structural result Theorem 5.1 is unconditional, but the advertised 'all non-linear polynomial relations ... in a simple combinatorial way' depends on this conjecture. The abstract and introduction should state this conditionality explicitly, or the conjecture should be proved. As written, the claims are stronger than the proven results.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3] Typo: 'Deligne–Kundsen–Mumford' should be 'Deligne–Knudsen–Mumford'.
  2. [Introduction, §3] Typos: 'isomoprhic' (Introduction) and 'canoncial' (Example 3.8) should be corrected.
  3. [Proof of Theorem 3.7] References to 'Theorem 3.10' and 'Theorem 3.11' should be Corollary 3.10 and Remark 3.11. Also, the references to 'Definition 2.5' as 'Theorem 2.5' and to 'Lemma 5.5' as 'Theorem 5.5' in Proposition 5.6 should be fixed.
  4. [§3, Lemma 3.9 and Corollary 3.10] The notation σ∈Σ_{n−1} is used with the cyclic convention σ_n=σ_1 in Lemma 3.9, but this convention is not restated. Given the sign sensitivity of the identities, it would be helpful to state explicitly how indices are taken cyclically.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: PT_n ≅ LC_n and the ideal description are derived from explicit Plücker identities and external theorems, not from assuming the target.

full rationale

The central isomorphism Theorem 3.7 is proved by an explicit induction using Lemma 3.9, a Plücker-relation telescoping identity, and Corollary 3.10, which derives the pullback of Δ_i z_σ from that identity. The definition of Δ_i z_σ is combinatorial and independent of the equality being proved; nothing in the proof substitutes the target statement for an assumption. The linear map L_n is constructed from the previously defined LC_n coordinates via Eq. (3.1) and the induction hypothesis, so the isomorphism is not built into the definitions. The open-variety statement Theorem 3.1 is proved from ratios of Parke-Taylor functions being cross-ratios, a standard characterization of M_{0,n}. The ideal description Theorem 5.1 uses the isomorphism ψ and standard toric-ideal facts; Proposition 4.4 is the standard adjacency-kernel characterization of toric ideals, and the Plücker lifts in Proposition 5.6 are checked by explicit computation. Degree and quadratic-generation statements import external results [7,20,13,25] rather than self-citations. The only self-referential item is the authors' Macaulay2 file [15] used to verify Proposition 4.13 for n=7,8,9; this is computational, reproducible evidence for a supporting claim and is not load-bearing for the main isomorphism or the general ideal theorem. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness/ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation. Possible sign/indexing errors in Lemma 3.9–Corollary 3.10 are correctness concerns, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted constants appear. The only choices are combinatorial conventions: the basis of Parke-Taylor functions with first two entries fixed, and the fixed points 1 and 2 in the comparison with the log canonical embedding. The supporting axioms are standard algebraic geometry facts, two domain facts about M0,n, and a computational assumption about Macaulay2 runs.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Plücker relations generate the ideal of Gr(2,n) and the Grassmannian is embedded by Plücker coordinates.
    Used throughout, e.g. in Lemma 3.9 and in Section 5 for lifts of Plücker relations.
  • domain assumption Kleiss-Kuijf linear identities imply that the (n-2)! functions with sigma_1=1, sigma_2=2 span all n! Parke-Taylor functions.
    Used to reduce polynomial relations to Sigma_n in Definition 2.5 and to express cross-ratios in Theorem 3.1; cited to [10,11].
  • domain assumption Gr(2,n)/(C*)^n is isomorphic to M_{0,n}, and cross-ratios determine the point of M_{0,n}.
    Used in Theorem 3.1 and Remark 3.2; cited to [23, Proposition 1.6].
  • domain assumption The log canonical embedding LC_n is exactly the Segre composition of the iterated Kapranov embedding, with the coordinate formula used in Equation (3.1).
    Used as the benchmark in Theorem 3.7; taken from [20,25], not re-derived.
  • standard math A basis of ker_Z(A_n) defines the toric ideal up to saturation by the product of variables.
    Used in Section 4 to justify that kernel binomials control T_n intersected with the torus, a key step for Theorem 5.1.
  • domain assumption Macaulay2 computations for n=7,8,9 verify Conjecture 4.12; the code is in the supplementary file ParkeTaylorToric.m2 [15].
    Computational premise for the conjecture; not independently re-run in this review.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Parke-Taylor varieties." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/66AD3BNE

@misc{pith2026250909323,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Parke-Taylor varieties},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/66AD3BNE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.09323}
}
abstract

Parke-Taylor functions are certain rational functions on the Grassmannian of lines encoding MHV amplitudes in particle physics. For $n$ particles there are $n!$ Parke-Taylor functions, corresponding to all orderings of the particles. Linear relations between these functions have been extensively studied in the last years. We here describe all non-linear polynomial relations between these functions in a simple combinatorial way and study the variety parametrized by them, called the Parke-Taylor variety. We show that the Parke-Taylor variety is linearly isomorphic to the log canonical embedding of the moduli space $\overline{\mathcal{M}}_{0,n}$ due to Keel and Tevelev, and that the intersection with the algebraic torus recovers the open part, $\mathcal{M}_{0,n}$. We give an explicit description of this isomorphism. Unlike the log canonical embedding, this Parke-Taylor embedding respects the symmetry of the $n$ marked points and is constructed in a single-step procedure, avoiding the intermediate embedding into a product of projective spaces.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09323 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The left and right weak order on S3 pictured on the left and right respectively. symmetric group Sn. We give a brief description of this partial order on permutations here and refer the reader to [2] for more information. We note that the description we give here is tailored specifically to the weak order on the symmetric group, instead of a general Coxeter group, since that will be our focus in this paper. Let σ ∈ … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Log Canonical Models and Positive Geometries

    math.AG 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    When a compactification has genus zero and a degree-one log canonical ring, canonical forms of positive geometries realize the log canonical embedding and supply its equations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Bourjaily, Freddy Cachazo, Alexander Postnikov, and Jaroslav Trnka

    Nima Arkani-Hamed, Jacob L. Bourjaily, Freddy Cachazo, Alexander Postnikov, and Jaroslav Trnka. On-shell structures of MHV amplitudes beyond the planar limit.J. High Energy Phys., 2015(6):16, 2015

    2015

  2. [2]

    Texts Math

    Anders Bj¨ orner and Francesco Brenti.Combinatorics of Coxeter groups, volume 231 ofGrad. Texts Math. New York, NY: Springer, 2005

    2005

  3. [3]

    Buchsbaum and David Eisenbud

    David A. Buchsbaum and David Eisenbud. Algebra structures for finite free resolutions, and some structure theorems for ideals of codimension 3.Am. J. Math., 99:447–485, 1977

    1977

  4. [4]

    ∆-algebra and scattering amplitudes

    Freddy Cachazo, Nick Early, Alfredo Guevara, and Sebastian Mizera. ∆-algebra and scattering amplitudes. J. High Energy Phys., 2019(2):46, 2019

    2019

  5. [5]

    Generalized color orderings: CEGM integrands and decoupling identities.Nucl

    Freddy Cachazo, Nick Early, and Yong Zhang. Generalized color orderings: CEGM integrands and decoupling identities.Nucl. Phys., B, 1004:36, 2024

    2024

  6. [6]

    Scattering of massless particles in arbitrary dimensions

    Freddy Cachazo, Song He, and Ellis Ye Yuan. Scattering of massless particles in arbitrary dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett., 113(17):171601, 2014

    2014

  7. [7]

    Projective embeddings of M 0,n and parking functions.J

    Renzo Cavalieri, Maria Gillespie, and Leonid Monin. Projective embeddings of M 0,n and parking functions.J. Comb. Theory, Ser. A, 182:30, 2021

    2021

  8. [8]

    Springer, 1997

    David Cox, John Little, and Donal O’Shea.Ideals, varieties, and algorithms, volume 3. Springer, 1997. 23

    1997

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    Cox, John B

    David A. Cox, John B. Little, and Henry K. Schenck.Toric varieties, volume 124 ofGrad. Stud. Math. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2011

    2011

  2. [10]

    Kleiss-Kuijf relations from momentum amplituhedron geometry.J

    David Damgaard, Livia Ferro, Tomasz Lukowski, and Robert Moerman. Kleiss-Kuijf relations from momentum amplituhedron geometry.J. High Energy Phys., 2021(7):42, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    Lie polynomials and a twistorial correspondence for amplitudes.Lett

    Hadleigh Frost and Lionel Mason. Lie polynomials and a twistorial correspondence for amplitudes.Lett. Math. Phys., 111(6):26, 2021

    2021

  4. [12]

    Equations for Chow and Hilbert quotients.Algebra Number Theory, 4(7):855–885, 2010

    Angela Gibney and Diane Maclagan. Equations for Chow and Hilbert quotients.Algebra Number Theory, 4(7):855–885, 2010

    2010

  5. [13]

    Griffin, and Jake Levinson

    Maria Gillespie, Sean T. Griffin, and Jake Levinson. A proof of a conjecture by Monin and Rana on equations defining M0,n. arXiv:2209.06688 [math.AG], 2022

    2022 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Grayson and Michael E

    Daniel R. Grayson and Michael E. Stillman. Macaulay2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry. Available athttp://www2.macaulay2.com

  7. [15]

    Supplementary material for Parke–Taylor Varieties

    Benjamin Hollering and Dmitrii Pavlov. Supplementary material for Parke–Taylor Varieties. Available athttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17098490, September 2025

    2025 doi

  8. [16]

    GRIN: an implementation of Gr¨ obner bases for integer programming

    Serkan Ho¸ sten and Bernd Sturmfels. GRIN: an implementation of Gr¨ obner bases for integer programming. InInteger programming and combinatorial optimization (Copenhagen, 1995), volume 920 ofLecture Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 267–276. Springer, Berlin, 1995

    1995

  9. [17]

    The equations for the moduli space ofnpoints on the line.Duke Math

    Benjamin Howard, John Millson, Andrew Snowden, and Ravi Vakil. The equations for the moduli space ofnpoints on the line.Duke Math. J., 146(2):175–226, 2009

    2009

  10. [18]

    M. M. Kapranov. Chow quotients of Grassmannians. I. InI. M. Gelfand seminar. Part 2: Papers of the Gelfand seminar in functional analysis held at Moscow University, Russia, September 1993, pages 29–110. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, 1993

    1993

  11. [19]

    M. M. Kapranov. Veronese curves and Grothendieck-Knudsen moduli space M0,n.J. Algebr. Geom., 2(2):239–262, 1993

    1993

  12. [20]

    Equations for M0,n.Int

    Sean Keel and Jenia Tevelev. Equations for M0,n.Int. J. Math., 20(9):1159–1184, 2009

    2009

  13. [21]

    On the minimal algebraic complexity of the rank-one approximation problem for general inner products

    Khazhgali Kozhasov, Alan Muniz, Yang Qi, and Luca Sodomaco. On the minimal algebraic complexity of the rank-one approximation problem for general inner products. arXiv:2309.15105 [math.AG], 2023

    2023

  14. [22]

    An invitation to positive geometries

    Thomas Lam. An invitation to positive geometries. InOpen Problems in Algebraic Combinatorics, volume 110 ofProceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics, pages 159–180. American Mathematical Society, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Moduli spaces in positive geometry.Matematiche (Catania), 80(1):17–101, 2025

    Thomas Lam. Moduli spaces in positive geometry.Matematiche (Catania), 80(1):17–101, 2025

    2025

  16. [24]

    American Mathe- matical Soc., 2021

    Mateusz Micha lek and Bernd Sturmfels.Invitation to nonlinear algebra, volume 211. American Mathe- matical Soc., 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Equations of M 0,n

    Leonid Monin and Julie Rana. Equations of M 0,n. InCombinatorial algebraic geometry. Selected papers from the 2016 apprenticeship program, Ottawa, Canada, July–December 2016, pages 113–132. Toronto: The Fields Institute for Research in the Mathematical Sciences; New York, NY: ...

    2016

  18. [26]

    The Magic Number Conjecture for the m = 2 amplituhedron and Parke-Taylor identities

    Matteo Parisi, Melissa Sherman-Bennett, Ran Tessler, and Lauren Williams. The Magic Number Conjecture for the m = 2 amplituhedron and Parke-Taylor identities. arXiv:2404.03026 [math.CO], 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Amplitude for n-gluon scattering.Physical Review Letters, 56(23):2459, 1986

    Stephen J Parke and Tomasz R Taylor. Amplitude for n-gluon scattering.Physical Review Letters, 56(23):2459, 1986

    1986

  20. [28]

    Bernd Sturmfels.Gr¨ obner bases and convex polytopes, volume 8 ofUniv. Lect. Ser.Providece, RI: AMS, American Mathematical Society, 1996

    1996

  21. [29]

    Commutative algebra of statistical ranking.J

    Bernd Sturmfels and Volkmar Welker. Commutative algebra of statistical ranking.J. Algebra, 361:264–286, 2012

    2012

  22. [30]

    Toric fiber products.J

    Seth Sullivant. Toric fiber products.J. Algebra, 316(2):560–577, 2007. Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences, Inselstr. 22, 04103 Leipzig, Germany Email address:benjamin.hollering@mis.mpg.de Technische Universit¨at Dresden, Zellescher Weg 12–14, 01069 Dresden, G...

    2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.