Stop comparing resummation methods

Abstract

I argue that the consistency of any resummation method can be established if the method follows a power counting derived from a hierarchy of scales. I.e. whether it encodes a top-down effective field theory. This resolves much confusion over which resummation method to use once an approximation scheme is settled on. And if no hierarchy of scales exists, you should be wary about resumming. I give evidence from the study of phase transitions in thermal field theory, where adopting a consistent power-counting scheme and performing a strict perturbative expansion dissolves many common problems of such studies: gauge dependence, strong renormalization scale dependence, the Goldstone boson catastrophe, IR divergences, imaginary potentials, mirages (illusory barriers), perturbative breakdown, and linear terms.