both relativistic and nonrelativistic wave functions, it is simplest to employ the EMA-noSV approach. Several previous papers have shown that the differences between EMA and full RDWIA calculations are relatively small for cross sections. Although that approximation does not provide the best description of the left-right asymmetry, $A_{LT}$, it has the advantage that the nonrelativistic wave function can be used directly.

Figure \[fig:Dutta-EMAnoSV\] compares EMA calculations using NLSH, HS, and NIKHEF wave functions with the JLab data for $Q^2 = 0.6$, 1.2, and 1.8 (GeV/$c$)$^2$. For each kinematics the top set are semi-inclusive data for $E_m < 80$ MeV, the second set shows a bin $15 \leq E_m \leq 25$ MeV dominated by the $1p$ shell, and the bottom set shows a bin $30 \leq E_m \leq 50$ MeV dominated by the $1s$ shell. The curves were fit to data in the range $|p_m| \leq 200$ MeV/$c$ neglecting, at present, the mixing between the shells. We will later find that filling of the $1p$ minimum and broadening of the $1s$ distribution can be described by mixing. These calculations employ the EDAD1 optical potential; other choices of potentials from Cooper [[*et al.* ]{}]{}[@Cooper93] produce small variations in the normalization factors with 