Detailed Comparison of Renormalization Scale-Setting Procedures based on the Principle of Maximum Conformality

It has become conventional to simply guess the renormalization scale and choose an arbitrary range of uncertainty when making perturbative QCD (pQCD) predictions. However, this {\it ad hoc} assignment of the renormalization scale and the estimate of the size of the resulting uncertainty leads to anomalous renormalization scheme-and-scale dependences. In fact, relations between physical observables must be independent of the theorist's choice of the renormalization scheme, and the renormalization scale in any given scheme at any given order of pQCD is not ambiguous. The {\it Principle of Maximum Conformality} (PMC), which generalizes the conventional Gell-Mann-Low method for scale-setting in perturbative QED to non-Abelian QCD, provides a rigorous method for achieving unambiguous scheme-independent, fixed-order predictions for observables consistent with the principles of the renormalization group. The renormalization scale in the PMC is fixed such that all $\beta$ terms are eliminated from the perturbative series and resumed into the running coupling; this procedure results in a convergent, scheme-independent conformal series without factorial renormalon divergences. In this paper, we will give a detailed comparison of these PMC approaches by comparing their predictions for three important quantities $R_{e^+e^-}$, $R_{\tau}$, and $\Gamma(H \to b \bar{b})$ up to four-loop pQCD corrections. Our numerical results show that the single-scale PMCs method, which involves a somewhat simpler analysis, can serve as a reliable substitute for the full multi-scale PMCm method, and that it leads to more precise pQCD predictions with less residual scale dependence.