1: \begin{abstract}

2:  We test the resummation techniques used in developing Pad\'e and Effective One

3:  Body (EOB) waveforms for gravitational wave detection. Convergence tests

4:  show that Pad\'e approximants of the gravitational wave energy flux do not 

5: accelerate the convergence of the standard Taylor approximants even in the test

6:  mass limit, and there is no reason why Pad\'e transformations should help in 

7: estimating parameters better in data analysis. Moreover, adding a pole 

8: to the flux seems unnecessary in the construction of these Pad\'e-approximated 

9:  flux formulas. Pad\'e approximants may be useful in suggesting the form of 

10: fitting formulas. 

11: We compare a 15-orbit numerical waveform of the Caltech-Cornell 

12: group to the suggested Pad\'e waveforms of Damour et al. in the equal mass, 

13: nonspinning quasi-circular case. The comparison 

14: suggests that the Pad\'e waveforms do not agree better with the numerical 

15: waveform than the standard Taylor based waveforms. 

16: Based on this result, we design a simple EOB model by modifiying the ET EOB model of 

17: Buonanno et al., using the Taylor

18: series of the flux with an unknown parameter at the fourth post-Newtonian  

19: order that we fit for. 

20: This simple EOB model generates a waveform having a phase difference 

21: of only 0.002 radians with the numerical waveform, much smaller than 0.04 radians  the 

22: phase uncertainty in the numerical data itself. An EOB Hamiltonian can make 

23: use of a Pad\'e transformation in its construction, but this is the only  

24: place Pad\'e transformations seem useful. 

25: \end{abstract}

26: