Reply to the Comment 'On large-N expansion'

TL;DR

This paper addresses and refutes a comment on a previously proposed pseudo-perturbative shifted-l expansion technique, clarifying misunderstandings and defending the original method.

Contribution

It provides a rebuttal to the comment, clarifying ambiguities and reaffirming the validity of the shifted-l expansion technique.

Findings

Comment is unfounded or ambiguous

Original method remains valid

Clarifies misunderstandings

Abstract

Fernandez Comment [1] on our pseudo-perturbative shifted-l expansion technique [2,3] is either unfounded or ambiguous.