to wait and see if there is already an explicit expression somewhere. (Or have I overlooked in your reference?) ]]>

Mirco: Andy Tonks thesis discusses a lot of things relevant to this. It is on line here. (I forgot to paste the link last time.)

]]>(The point is that the shift looks not complete trivial, as for example in the AW map

the sum is now only up to (n-1), isn't it? ... And as far as I see the shuffle sum must

be written different,too)

Do you have an explicit term? ]]>

My question is now how this affects the definition of the above maps

What beyond the evident shift in their integer labels do you have in mind? I am not sure if I understand your question.

]]>I am not sure that it helps but Andy Tonks worked out the Eilenberg-Whitney stuff for crossed complexes in his thesis. As this is â€™many objectâ€™ it does have the aspect of an augmented situation and is worth looking at anyhow. The result is discussed in Brown-Higgins-Sivera: Nonabelian Algebraic Topology. (p. 360 I think).

]]>(http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Eilenberg-Zilber+map)

(http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Alexander-Whitney+map)

are given in the "standard simplicial dimension notation". However in the setting of abelian simplicial groups

and chain complexes we have frequently the situation where we work with augmented simplicial sets

and in that scenario there is the 'upshifted dimension counting' where we define the dimension of the augmented

simplex as zero instead of $(-1)$. (Explained for example in

http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/simplex+category

My question is now how this affects the definition of the above maps and since I can't find anything on the web

I suggest to add such a augmented definition to the nLab entries on those topics.

If someone can post a link or something where this is worked out, I will change the entry if you people agree. ]]>