Dataset: 

--> Run 21, Collision = Au-Au,  √s = 7.7  GeV, Trigger Setup = production_7p7GeV_2021
--> Run Period: Week of Jan, 25 -- Apr, 26
--> Total Runs: 2909
Runlog: https://online.star.bnl.gov/RunLogRun21/
Working Directory: /star/u/pokhrel/TPC_Cal/Run21/AuAu7p7/
Time stamp used: 2021-01-31 19:33:46 GMT  (First stored run date)
Daq files are picked up randomly from the whole run period - 3-4 runs per week. Total 46 runs, which spans whole data set, used for the calibration. 
Attached daq*.txt file contains all the runs used for this calibration.
--> Bfc chain options used: P2021a,StiCA,EbyET0,BEmcChkStat,-hitfilt,SCScalerCal,-mtd,-btof,-etofA,-picoWrite
       Opted out -mtd,-btof,-etofA,-picoWrite, as these options are not required for SC&GL calibration. 

Pass01 results: 
Calibration macro returned grid leak value of 0.00 which is forcing some fit parameters at their limit. Below is the result produced fixing GL = 0.15. Fixing the GL value didn't solve the parameter limit issue.  

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000166 :: gapf => 0.006560

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2          : 0.0393537 +/- 1.26452 (AT LIMIT!)

log(g5)     : 4.56129 +/- 1.24133 (AT LIMIT!)

log(SC)     : -16.9603 +0.760416/0 or +/- 1.16488

log(SC)     : -16.9603 +/- 1.16488

SO          : 6340.82 +5365.94/-5359.93 or +/- 5467.93

SO          : 6340.82 +/- 5362.93

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.307e-08 +/- 5.018e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6341 +/-   5363))

  with GL =  0.15 +/-  0.00

Although, there is very good linearity in between the measured and and the fit, g2 and log(g5) are at their limit. The fit may not be trustworthy at this time. Needs more iteration. 

Pass02 : 

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000166 :: gapf => 0.006559

 

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2          : 0.024953 +/- 1.70625 (AT LIMIT!)

log(g5)     : 5.39537 +0/0 or +/- 356.947

log(g5)     : 5.39537 +/- 1.83153

log(SC)     : -16.9618 +0.759542/0 or +/- 1.16481

log(SC)     : -16.9618 +/- 1.16481

SO          : 6345.18 +5364.82/-5354.38 or +/- 5466.26

SO          : 6345.18 +/- 5359.6

 

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.301e-08 +/- 5.01e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6345 +/-   5360))

  with GL =  0.15 +/-  0.00

In this pass as well, the g2 parameter (conversion coefficient in GridLeak correction) is outside the limit, the value of which is not trustworthy, however, the log(g5) value is now within the limit. I tried fixing different GL values ranging from 0.1 to 3.0, this error persists for any GL values. Passing these values in the next iteration, if that helps.
 
Pass03:
For the fixed GL =0.5, all the parameters are free from errors now. The measured SC and the fit correlation is good as shown in figure below.  

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000168 :: gapf => 0.006850

 

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2          : 2.26062 +71.9244/-77.81 or +/- 12.5227

g2          : 2.26062 +/- 74.8672

log(g5)     : 2.5237 +0/-3.41527 or +/- 7.04557

log(g5)     : 2.5237 +/- 7.04557

log(SC)     : -16.9866 +0.720493/0 or +/- 1.07128

log(SC)     : -16.9866 +/- 1.07128

SO          : 6141.79 +5497.8/-5531.02 or +/- 5612.1

SO          : 6141.79 +/- 5514.41

 

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.196e-08 +/- 4.495e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6142 +/-   5514))

  with GL =  0.50 +/-  0.00

Just to give a try to see the effect of varying GL: 
For GL=0.1, 

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000169 :: gapf => 0.006848

 

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2          : 2.32864 +54.9603/-53.9701 or +/- 68.8746

g2          : 2.32864 +/- 54.4652

log(g5)     : 2.52556 +0/-4.81412 or +/- 5.29708

log(g5)     : 2.52556 +/- 5.29708

log(SC)     : -16.9536 +0.719969/0 or +/- 1.0702

log(SC)     : -16.9536 +/- 1.0702

SO          : 6149.38 +5490/-5523.44 or +/- 5604.37

SO          : 6149.38 +/- 5506.72

 

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.337e-08 +/- 4.641e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6149 +/-   5507))

  with GL =  0.10 +/-  0.00 
For Gl=0.15

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000168 :: gapf => 0.006848

 

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2          : 2.26553 +58.1576/-56.7822 or +/- 7.31927

g2          : 2.26553 +/- 57.4699

log(g5)     : 2.52534 +0/-4.47651 or +/- 2.22416

log(g5)     : 2.52534 +/- 2.22416

log(SC)     : -16.9577 +0.720008/0 or +/- 1.07028

log(SC)     : -16.9577 +/- 1.07028

SO          : 6148.47 +5490.62/-5524.02 or +/- 5604.97

SO          : 6148.47 +/- 5507.32

 

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.319e-08 +/- 4.622e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6148 +/-   5507))

  with GL =  0.15 +/-  0.00

For Gl=0.20

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000168 :: gapf => 0.006849

 

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2          : 2.26278 +61.4705/-59.8725 or +/- 13.1253

g2          : 2.26278 +/- 60.6715

log(g5)     : 2.52293 +0/-4.23562 or +/- 2.47776

log(g5)     : 2.52293 +/- 2.47776

log(SC)     : -16.9631 +0.720712/0 or +/- 0.538417

log(SC)     : -16.9631 +/- 0.538417

SO          : 6144.48 +5499.03/-5532.34 or +/- 5613.52

SO          : 6144.48 +/- 5515.68

 

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.295e-08 +/- 2.313e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6144 +/-   5516))

  with GL =  0.20 +/-  0.00

Going to lower GL value does't make any changes in the fit results. Since all the results are similar for varying GL, I am picking the one with GL=0.15, which has better STD value than GL=0.1 (may be insignificant to consider good/bad!). 

Final Calibration parameters: 

USING STDDEV sc => 0.000168 :: gapf => 0.006848

 

SpaceCharge & GridLeak fit results {scaler: bbcw}:

g2           : 2.26553 +58.1576/-56.7822 or +/- 7.31927

g2           : 2.26553 +/- 57.4699

log(g5)      : 2.52534 +0/-4.47651 or +/- 2.22416

log(g5)      : 2.52534 +/- 2.22416

log(SC)      : -16.9577 +0.720008/0 or +/- 1.07028

log(SC)      : -16.9577 +/- 1.07028

SO           : 6148.47 +5490.62/-5524.02 or +/- 5604.97

SO           : 6148.47 +/- 5507.32

 

*** FINAL CALIBRATION VALUES: ***

sc = (4.319e-08 +/- 4.622e-08) * ((bbcw) - (  6148 +/-   5507))

  with GL =  0.15 +/-  0.00