Coleman-Weinberg regime’) this is given by $$\label{vtriv}
V_{\text{triv}}(\varphi_B)=
\frac{ \lambda_{\text{eff}} \varphi^4_B}{4!} +
\frac{\Omega^4(\varphi^2_B) }{64\pi^2}
(\ln\frac{\Omega^2(\varphi^2_B)}{\Lambda^2} -\frac{1}{2})$$ with $$\label{omega}
\Omega^2(\varphi_B)=
\frac{\lambda_{\text{eff}} \varphi^2_B}{2}$$ all differences among the various approximations being isolated in the relation between the effective coupling $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)$ and the bare coupling.

For instance, at one loop $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_B$ while in the gaussian approximation (see Ref.[@Branchina:1993rj]) $\lambda_{\text{eff}}$ corresponds to resum all one-loop bubbles with mass $\Omega=\Omega(\varphi^2_B)$ so that $$\label{leff}
\lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)=\frac{\lambda_B}
{1+ \frac{\lambda_B}{16\pi^2} \ln\frac{\Lambda}{\Omega} }$$ Now, since all approximations display the same general structure in Eqs.(\[vtriv\]) and (\[omega\]), upon minimization and after setting $\varphi_B=\pm v_B$, one finds the same leading logarithmic trend of the effective coupling $$\label{ltriv}
 \lambda_{\text{eff}}(m_H) \sim
\frac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H}}$$ Formally, this is precisely the same relation obtained in perturbation theory from the leading-order (LO) renormalized coupling $$\label{lambdaR}
 \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H)
=\frac{\lambda_B}{1+
\frac{3\lambda_B}{ 16\pi^2}\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H} }$$ after sending $\lambda_B \to \infty$ at the Landau pole $$\label{lambdaR2}
 \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) \sim
\frac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H
Coleman - Weinberg regime ’) this is given by $ $ \label{vtriv } 
 V_{\text{triv}}(\varphi_B)= 
 \frac { \lambda_{\text{eff } } \varphi^4_B}{4! } + 
 \frac{\Omega^4(\varphi^2_B) } { 64\pi^2 } 
 (\ln\frac{\Omega^2(\varphi^2_B)}{\Lambda^2 } -\frac{1}{2})$$ with $ $ \label{omega } 
 \Omega^2(\varphi_B)= 
 \frac{\lambda_{\text{eff } } \varphi^2_B}{2}$$ all differences among the various approximation being sequester in the relation between the effective coupling $ \lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)$ and the bare yoke. 

 For instance, at one loop $ \lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_B$ while in the gaussian approximation (watch Ref.[@Branchina:1993rj ]) $ \lambda_{\text{eff}}$ corresponds to resum all one - loop bubbles with batch $ \Omega=\Omega(\varphi^2_B)$ so that $ $ \label{leff } 
 \lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)=\frac{\lambda_B } 
 { 1 + \frac{\lambda_B}{16\pi^2 } \ln\frac{\Lambda}{\Omega } } $ $ Now, since all approximations expose the same general structure in Eqs.(\[vtriv\ ]) and (\[omega\ ]), upon minimization and after setting $ \varphi_B=\pm v_B$, one line up the same leading logarithmic trend of the effective coupling $ $ \label{ltriv } 
  \lambda_{\text{eff}}(m_H) \sim 
 \frac { 16\pi^2 } { 3 \ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H}}$$ Formally, this is precisely the same sexual intercourse obtained in perturbation theory from the lead - order (LO) renormalized coupling $ $ \label{lambdaR } 
  \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) 
 = \frac{\lambda_B}{1 + 
 \frac{3\lambda_B } { 16\pi^2}\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H } } $ $ after sending $ \lambda_B \to \infty$ at the Landau punt $ $ \label{lambdaR2 } 
  \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) \sim 
 \frac { 16\pi^2 } { 3 \ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H
Colfman-Weinberg regime’) this is given by $$\laywl{vtrit}
V_{\text{tdiv}}(\varphk_B)=
\frac{ \lambda_{\text{eff}} \varphi^4_B}{4!} +
\feac{\Omtya^4(\varphi^2_B) }{64\pi^2}
(\ln\frac{\Omdga^2(\varphi^2_H)}{\Lambda^2} -\drac{1}{2})$$ qith $$\label{omega}
\Omenc^2(\varpgl_B)=
\frae{\lembda_{\text{eff}} \vatphi^2_B}{2}$$ all dixferences amonc ghz various approximations being isolaeed in yhf relation betreen ehe sffective coupling $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lajbda_{\texu{eff}}(\Omega)$ and the nare coupling.

For instance, wt oje loop $\lambda_{\text{fff}}=\lambda_B$ qhilq in the gausrian approqnmation (see Ref.[@Branchina:1993rj]) $\lambda_{\text{eff}}$ curres'onds to rewun apn one-loop bnbbles with mass $\Omega=\Omegd(\varphi^2_N)$ so that $$\labek{lehf}
\lanbda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)=\frac{\lembda_B}
{1+ \frac{\lambda_B}{16\pi^2} \ln\frac{\Lakbba}{\Omega} }$$ Now, since alo qpprofimadionr dirplzy tge samf gxneral strudture in Eqw.(\[vtriv\]) and (\[omega\]), uppn ninimization znd afeew setting $\varphi_B=\pm v_B$, one finds the sake meading logarithmic trebd of the effective clupling $$\lwbel{ltriv}
 \lambda_{\text{eff}}(m_H) \sim
\frac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \ln \frac{\Lambga}{m_H}}$$ Hofmaoln, thkw ls precisely the same relation obtained in pewfutbstion theory fvom the leading-ordrr (LP) renormalized couplnhg $$\label{lambdaR}
 \lambfa_{\text{LJ}}(m_H)
=\frqc{\lambda_B}{1+
\srac{3\kambda_B}{ 16\pi^2}\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H} }$$ qfter sendiny $\lqmbda_B \to \infty$ at the Landau polg $$\labek{lambdaR2}
 \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) \sim
\rrac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \ln \frac{\Lambsx}{m_H
Coleman-Weinberg regime’) this is given by $$\label{vtriv} \lambda_{\text{eff}} + \frac{\Omega^4(\varphi^2_B) (\ln\frac{\Omega^2(\varphi^2_B)}{\Lambda^2} -\frac{1}{2})$$ with differences the various approximations isolated in the between the effective coupling $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)$ and bare coupling. For instance, at one loop $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_B$ while in the gaussian approximation Ref.[@Branchina:1993rj]) $\lambda_{\text{eff}}$ corresponds to resum all one-loop bubbles with mass $\Omega=\Omega(\varphi^2_B)$ so that \lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)=\frac{\lambda_B} \frac{\lambda_B}{16\pi^2} }$$ since all approximations display the same general structure in Eqs.(\[vtriv\]) and (\[omega\]), upon minimization and after $\varphi_B=\pm v_B$, one finds the same leading logarithmic of the effective coupling \lambda_{\text{eff}}(m_H) \sim \frac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \frac{\Lambda}{m_H}}$$ this is the relation in perturbation theory the leading-order (LO) renormalized coupling $$\label{lambdaR} \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) =\frac{\lambda_B}{1+ \frac{3\lambda_B}{ 16\pi^2}\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H} }$$ after sending $\lambda_B \to \infty$ the Landau \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) \sim 16\pi^2}{ \ln
Coleman-Weinberg regime’) this Is given by $$\lAbel{vTriV}
V_{\tExT{triV}}(\varPhi_B)=
\frac{ \lambda_{\TExt{eFf}} \varphi^4_B}{4!} +
\frac{\Omega^4(\varpHi^2_B) }{64\pi^2}
(\Ln\FRac{\OMEgA^2(\varpHi^2_B)}{\LambDA^2} -\fRAC{1}{2})$$ wiTh $$\LaBel{OmEGa}
\omega^2(\VarPhi_B)=
\fraC{\lambda_{\texT{efF}} \vArphi^2_B}{2}$$ all difFErEnces among The Various approXimAtions BeIng ISolatEd iN the rElatioN BetweeN the effecTiVE couplINg $\lambdA_{\TExT{eff}}=\Lambda_{\text{eff}}(\OmegA)$ AnD The bare couplinG.

For inStANcE, AT onE loOp $\lambda_{\teXt{Eff}}=\laMBda_B$ whiLE iN THE gaUSsian approximAtion (see Ref.[@bRanChina:1993rJ]) $\lAmbDA_{\text{eFf}}$ corReSPonDs to resum alL one-Loop bubblEs with MAss $\OmegA=\omega(\vaRphi^2_B)$ sO thAt $$\lAbel{LEfF}
\lAmbDa_{\TExt{EFf}}(\omeGA)=\frAc{\lambda_b}
{1+ \fRaC{\lambDa_B}{16\pI^2} \LN\FRac{\LAmbDa}{\OmEga} }$$ NoW, since all apprOxiMatiONs dIsplaY the sAme gEnEral sTructuRe in EQs.(\[Vtriv\]) and (\[omega\]), upOn miNimizatioN anD aFteR sEttinG $\Varphi_b=\pm V_B$, oNe finds The same LEadInG LOGaRithmic trend of the eFfECTiVe coupliNg $$\labeL{LtRiV}
 \Lambda_{\teXt{Eff}}(M_H) \siM
\FRac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \Ln \frAC{\LAmbda}{m_H}}$$ FOrmallY, ThIs Is preciSeLy the sAmE reLatIon obTAineD in perTurbatioN theoRY from the leadinG-Order (LO) renormALiZED cOUpliNg $$\lAbel{lambdaR}
 \LambDA_{\texT{LO}}(m_h)
=\FrAc{\lAMbda_B}{1+
\Frac{3\lAmBDa_b}{ 16\Pi^2}\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H} }$$ aftEr SendinG $\lambDa_B \to \infty$ at tHe Landau poLE $$\LAbel{lambDaR2}
 \lAMbDA_{\text{LO}}(m_H) \sim
\frAc{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \lN \frac{\LambdA}{M_H
Coleman-Weinberg regime’)this is gi ven b y $ $\l ab el{v triv }
V_{\text{tri v }}(\ varphi_B)=
\frac{ \lam bda_{ \t e xt{e f f} } \va rphi^4_ B }{ 4 ! } + 
\ fr ac{ \O m eg a^4(\ var phi^2_B ) }{64\pi^ 2}(\ ln\frac{\Ome g a^ 2(\varphi^ 2_B )}{\Lambda^2 } - \frac{ 1} {2} ) $$ wi th$$\la bel{om e ga}
\O mega^2(\v ar p hi_B)= \frac{\ l a mb da_{ \text{eff}} \varp h i^ 2 _B}{2}$$ all d iffere nc e sa m ong  th e variousap proxi m ationsb ei n g iso l ated in the r elation bet w een  the e ff ect i ve cou pling  $ \ lam bda_{\text{ eff} }=\lambda _{\tex t {eff}}( \ Omega)$  and t hebar e co u pl in g.
F o r i n st anc e , a t one lo op  $ \lamb da_{ \ t e x t{ef f}} =\la mbda_ B$ while in t hegaus s ian  appr oxima tion  ( see R ef.[@B ranch in a:1993rj]) $\la mbda _{\text{e ff} }$  co rr espon d s to r esu m a ll one- loop bu b ble sw i t hmass $\Omega=\Omeg a( \ v ar phi^2_B) $ so t h at  $ $ \label{l ef f}\lam b d a_{\t ext{ e ff }}(\Omeg a)=\fr a c{ \l ambda_B }{1+ \f ra c{\ lam bda_B } {16\ pi^2}\ln\frac {\Lam b da}{\Omega} }$ $  Now, since a l la p pr o xima tio ns displaythes amegene r al  st r uctur e inEq s .( \ [vtriv\]) and (\[om eg a\]),uponminimizationand afters e t ting $\v arph i _B = \pm v_B$, onefinds  the samel eading l ogari thmic tr end of th e effectiv e c oup lin g $ $ \ la bel{ltriv}
 \ l a mbda _{ \text{e ff} }(m_H)\si m
\ fra c{16 \pi^2}{ 3  \ln \fr ac {\ La mb da} {m_H} } $$ Forma ll y,th isis pr e cisely  thesame  r el a tio n obtai n ed i n pe rt ur bati onth eoryfrom the  leadin g-order ( LO) reno rm al ized co upling $$\lab el {lambdaR} \ lam bda_{\ t e xt{LO}}( m_H)
=\frac{\lambda_B}{ 1 +
\frac {3\ lambd a_B} { 16\pi^2 }\l n \fra c{\ L ambda} {m_H}}$$ a ft ers e nding $ \l amb da _B \to \in f t y$at th eLand au pole  $$\label{lambdaR2 } 
 \ lambda_{\text {LO }}(m _ H )\si m 
\ f rac {1 6\p i ^ 2}{ 3 \ln \frac {\Lambda}{ m_ H 
Coleman-Weinberg regime’)_this is_given by $$\label{vtriv}
V_{\text{triv}}(\varphi_B)=
\frac{ \lambda_{\text{eff}}_\varphi^4_B}{4!} +
\frac{\Omega^4(\varphi^2_B)_}{64\pi^2}
(\ln\frac{\Omega^2(\varphi^2_B)}{\Lambda^2}_-\frac{1}{2})$$ with_$$\label{omega}
\Omega^2(\varphi_B)=
\frac{\lambda_{\text{eff}}_\varphi^2_B}{2}$$ all differences_among the various_approximations being isolated in_the relation between_the_effective coupling $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)$ and the bare coupling.

For instance, at one loop $\lambda_{\text{eff}}=\lambda_B$ while in_the_gaussian approximation_(see_Ref.[@Branchina:1993rj])_$\lambda_{\text{eff}}$ corresponds to resum all_one-loop bubbles with mass $\Omega=\Omega(\varphi^2_B)$_so that_$$\label{leff}
\lambda_{\text{eff}}(\Omega)=\frac{\lambda_B}
{1+ \frac{\lambda_B}{16\pi^2} \ln\frac{\Lambda}{\Omega} }$$ Now, since all approximations_display_the same general_structure in Eqs.(\[vtriv\]) and (\[omega\]), upon minimization and after_setting $\varphi_B=\pm v_B$, one finds the_same leading logarithmic_trend_of_the effective coupling $$\label{ltriv}
_\lambda_{\text{eff}}(m_H) \sim
\frac{ 16\pi^2}{ 3 \ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H}}$$_Formally, this is precisely the same_relation obtained in perturbation theory from the_leading-order (LO) renormalized coupling $$\label{lambdaR}
 \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H)
=\frac{\lambda_B}{1+
\frac{3\lambda_B}{_16\pi^2}\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H} }$$ after sending_$\lambda_B \to_\infty$ at the Landau pole_$$\label{lambdaR2}
 \lambda_{\text{LO}}(m_H) \sim
\frac{_16\pi^2}{ 3_\ln \frac{\Lambda}{m_H