that this LEC cures cutoff dependence already at a lower order – and hence that the PC is inconsistent. One should then study the convergence pattern as the LEC is promoted to a lower order such that the cutoff dependence decreases always between subsequent orders. This may help to construct a consistent PC by trial-and-error and iteration. Remember also that after a LEC starts contributing at a certain order, it is re-adjusted at each subsequent order to absorb both cutoff effects and still match its determining datum.

[**Calculating Higher Orders**]{} Traditionally, observables beyond LO have been found by “partially resumming” contributions, i.e. the power-counted potential is iterated like in Weinberg’s original suggestion. Since corrections to the LO potential are defined as parametrically small, they can be included in “strict perturbation”, avoiding potential problems with spurious deeply bound state which can be generated by iteration [@Vanasse:2013sda]. This may also provide clearer signals for the PC test.

Picking Observables
-------------------

[**Isolating Dynamical Effects**]{} While any observable could be chosen, those which are free from kinematic or other constraints (e.g. from symmetries) are preferred. Consider the scattering amplitude ${\mathcal{A}}_l$ in the $l$th partial wave (for simplicity, assume no mixing). Since it is complex, 