constrained by using the relation in Eq. (\[eq;moneoveral\]) with the binding momenta $\gamma_l$. To examine the sensitivity to the choice of data sets, we employ three sets of the phase shift data [@tetal-prc09] below the resonance energy for each partial wave, which have different energy ranges: three data sets for $l=0$ denoted by $S0$, $S1$, $S2$ have the data at $T_\alpha = 2.6$-3.6, 2.6-3.8, 2.6-4.0 MeV, respectively, those for $l=1 (2)$ denoted by $P0$, $P1$, $P2$ ($D0$, $D1$, $D2$) have the data at $T_\alpha = 2.6$-3.0, 2.6-3.1, 2.6-3.2 MeV, respectively, and those for $l=3$ denoted by $F0$, $F1$, $F2$ have the data at $T_\alpha = 2.6$-4.6, 2.6-4.8, 2.6-5.0 MeV, respectively.

When the parameters are fitted to the data, large cancellations between the terms in powers of $k^2$ appearing from the $K_l(k)$ and $2\kappa H_l(k)$ functions, the $r_l$, $P_l$, $Q_l$, $R_l$ effective range terms and from the $2\kappa H_l(k)$ function, are expected. We denote the terms from the $2\kappa H_l(k)$ function corresponding to the effective range terms as $\tilde{r}_l$, $\tilde{P}_l$, $\tilde{Q}_l$, $\tilde{R}_l$, and we have && \_0 = ,   \_0 = - ,   \_0 = , \[eq;tilde\_values\_s-wave\]\
&& \_1 = ,   \_1 = - ,   \_1 = , \[eq;tilde\_values\_p-wave\]\
&& \_2 