Why is the high-pass filter result in a discrete wavelet transform (DWT) downsampled?Why do Dyadic...

How would modern naval warfare have to have developed differently for battleships to still be relevant in the 21st century?

How risky is real estate?

Trainee keeps missing deadlines for independent learning

Is there a maximum distance from a planet that a moon can orbit?

What reason would an alien civilization have for building a Dyson Sphere (or Swarm) if cheap Nuclear fusion is available?

Why the feminine "la" in "à la Leonardo DiCaprio", though he is a man?

Did Karl Marx ever use any example that involved cotton and dollars to illustrate the way capital and surplus value were generated?

Has there been any indication at all that further negotiation between the UK and EU is possible?

Is this one of the engines from the 9/11 aircraft?

Why doesn't a marching band have strings?

When to remove insignificant variables?

How can I politely work my way around not liking coffee or beer when it comes to professional networking?

Hot coffee brewing solutions for deep woods camping

STM Microcontroller burns every time

Long term BTC investing

Folding basket - is there such a thing?

How to make clear to people I don't want to answer their "Where are you from?" question?

Where can I find a database of galactic spectra?

What is the origin of Scooby-Doo's name?

If you snatch, I trade

Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum – Lucretius

How dangerous are set-size assumptions?

Impossible darts scores

Are all instances of trolls turning to stone ultimately references back to Tolkien?



Why is the high-pass filter result in a discrete wavelet transform (DWT) downsampled?


Why do Dyadic filterbanks downsample the high pass signal portions?Should I ever pick the continuous wavelet transform over the discrete one? DWT vs CWT vs STFTCan anyone help me with good reference books for Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT)DWT versus band-pass filterReal-time wavelet decomposition and reconstruction for ECG feature extractionDiscrete Wavelet Transform: Specifics of Filter BankPlease help me understand this paper about Discrete Wavelet Transform!High frequencies disappear when applying discrete wavelet transformDiscrete Wavelet Transform (DWT) Filter BankObtaining Continuous Wavelet Transform coefficients from Discrete Wavelet Transform






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







1












$begingroup$


From Wikipedia's description of the Discrete Wavelet Transform, a signal yields a set of:




  • approximation coefficients (low-pass: by averaging + downsampling)

  • detail coefficients (high-pass: convolving with wavelet + downsampling)


DWT 1 stage



This process is cascaded over approximation coefficients:



cascade



Why is the high-frequency part of a signal downsampled and how does it retain information? Can it be reconstructed? Is information lost due to the Nyquist theorem?





Sources I looked at:




  • Mathworks: Wavelet decomposition algorithm

  • Guide for wavelet transforms for machine learning










share|improve this question











$endgroup$



















    1












    $begingroup$


    From Wikipedia's description of the Discrete Wavelet Transform, a signal yields a set of:




    • approximation coefficients (low-pass: by averaging + downsampling)

    • detail coefficients (high-pass: convolving with wavelet + downsampling)


    DWT 1 stage



    This process is cascaded over approximation coefficients:



    cascade



    Why is the high-frequency part of a signal downsampled and how does it retain information? Can it be reconstructed? Is information lost due to the Nyquist theorem?





    Sources I looked at:




    • Mathworks: Wavelet decomposition algorithm

    • Guide for wavelet transforms for machine learning










    share|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      From Wikipedia's description of the Discrete Wavelet Transform, a signal yields a set of:




      • approximation coefficients (low-pass: by averaging + downsampling)

      • detail coefficients (high-pass: convolving with wavelet + downsampling)


      DWT 1 stage



      This process is cascaded over approximation coefficients:



      cascade



      Why is the high-frequency part of a signal downsampled and how does it retain information? Can it be reconstructed? Is information lost due to the Nyquist theorem?





      Sources I looked at:




      • Mathworks: Wavelet decomposition algorithm

      • Guide for wavelet transforms for machine learning










      share|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      From Wikipedia's description of the Discrete Wavelet Transform, a signal yields a set of:




      • approximation coefficients (low-pass: by averaging + downsampling)

      • detail coefficients (high-pass: convolving with wavelet + downsampling)


      DWT 1 stage



      This process is cascaded over approximation coefficients:



      cascade



      Why is the high-frequency part of a signal downsampled and how does it retain information? Can it be reconstructed? Is information lost due to the Nyquist theorem?





      Sources I looked at:




      • Mathworks: Wavelet decomposition algorithm

      • Guide for wavelet transforms for machine learning







      wavelet nyquist dwt






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 8 hours ago







      hazrmard

















      asked 8 hours ago









      hazrmardhazrmard

      1137 bronze badges




      1137 bronze badges






















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$

          Assume the original sampling rate is $F_s$ and that the filters are perfect brickwall Halfband filters. After the low pass filtering the frequency content is from $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. Because of the new bandwidth, the sampling rate can be reduced to $F_s/2$.



          For the high-pass filter, the frequency content lies in the range $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$. There is no content in the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. We can downsample by a factor of 2 in this case as well. The downsampling causes the frequency content in the $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$ to be aliased into the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$, but because there is no frequency content in this range, due to the high-pass filter, we have not lost any information.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
            $endgroup$
            – hazrmard
            4 hours ago





















          1












          $begingroup$

          The whole idea is that every level splits the image information in two equal halves, which can be represented by half the number of coefficient as the previous level, each.



          Otherwise, you'd not be doing much of a decomposition, would you?



          So, since you only need half of the coefficients (the rest is redundant), you just keep half of the coefficients. That's what the decimation stage does.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            1












            $begingroup$

            The classical discrete wavelet transform is critically decimated. In other words, it should preserve the quantity of "samples". In other words, apart from data border effects, the number of wavelet coefficients should be the same as the numer of data samples.



            More generally, a critically-sampled, analysis multi-band filter bank with $M$ channels ($M=2$ for the DWT) is composed of $M$ filters $H_m$ in parallel, followed by downsampling factors $k_m$, such that $sum_{min{1ldots M}} 1/k_m=1$.



            Invertible filter banks require the existence of a perfect synthesis filter bank. It is composed of $M$ filters $G_m$ in parallel, combined onto an output, preceded by the corresponding upsampling factors $k_m$. Input and output thus have the same global number of samples. But information is not lost only if certain conditions on the $H_m$ and $G_m$ are met.



            Of course, with $M=1$, no subsampling is required (no aliasing), but if $H_1$ is not invertible, you will loose information. Moreover, if $H_1$ is FIR, is inverse is not (except for trivial cases).



            The magic of wavelets is that, with $M=2$, there are many pairs of FIR filters such that, even if you downsample their output by $2$ and create aliasing, FIR synthesis filter bank exist. So 2-fold downsampling creates aliasing on both the low-pass and the high pass filter outputs (in fact, the high-pass output is shifted to the lower part of the spectrum). But the synthesis filter bank can cancel this aliasing.



            Finally, for some well-chosen analysis and synthesis filters, even if aliasing occur in the middle, it is finally cancelled, Nyquist remains fulfilled.






            share|improve this answer









            $endgroup$
















              Your Answer








              StackExchange.ready(function() {
              var channelOptions = {
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "295"
              };
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
              createEditor();
              });
              }
              else {
              createEditor();
              }
              });

              function createEditor() {
              StackExchange.prepareEditor({
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: true,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              imageUploader: {
              brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
              contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
              allowUrls: true
              },
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdsp.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f59013%2fwhy-is-the-high-pass-filter-result-in-a-discrete-wavelet-transform-dwt-downsam%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes








              3 Answers
              3






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              3












              $begingroup$

              Assume the original sampling rate is $F_s$ and that the filters are perfect brickwall Halfband filters. After the low pass filtering the frequency content is from $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. Because of the new bandwidth, the sampling rate can be reduced to $F_s/2$.



              For the high-pass filter, the frequency content lies in the range $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$. There is no content in the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. We can downsample by a factor of 2 in this case as well. The downsampling causes the frequency content in the $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$ to be aliased into the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$, but because there is no frequency content in this range, due to the high-pass filter, we have not lost any information.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
                $endgroup$
                – hazrmard
                4 hours ago


















              3












              $begingroup$

              Assume the original sampling rate is $F_s$ and that the filters are perfect brickwall Halfband filters. After the low pass filtering the frequency content is from $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. Because of the new bandwidth, the sampling rate can be reduced to $F_s/2$.



              For the high-pass filter, the frequency content lies in the range $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$. There is no content in the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. We can downsample by a factor of 2 in this case as well. The downsampling causes the frequency content in the $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$ to be aliased into the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$, but because there is no frequency content in this range, due to the high-pass filter, we have not lost any information.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$













              • $begingroup$
                Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
                $endgroup$
                – hazrmard
                4 hours ago
















              3












              3








              3





              $begingroup$

              Assume the original sampling rate is $F_s$ and that the filters are perfect brickwall Halfband filters. After the low pass filtering the frequency content is from $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. Because of the new bandwidth, the sampling rate can be reduced to $F_s/2$.



              For the high-pass filter, the frequency content lies in the range $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$. There is no content in the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. We can downsample by a factor of 2 in this case as well. The downsampling causes the frequency content in the $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$ to be aliased into the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$, but because there is no frequency content in this range, due to the high-pass filter, we have not lost any information.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



              Assume the original sampling rate is $F_s$ and that the filters are perfect brickwall Halfband filters. After the low pass filtering the frequency content is from $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. Because of the new bandwidth, the sampling rate can be reduced to $F_s/2$.



              For the high-pass filter, the frequency content lies in the range $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$. There is no content in the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$. We can downsample by a factor of 2 in this case as well. The downsampling causes the frequency content in the $frac{F_s}{4} rightarrow frac{F_s}{2}$ to be aliased into the range $0 rightarrow frac{F_s}{4}$, but because there is no frequency content in this range, due to the high-pass filter, we have not lost any information.







              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered 5 hours ago









              DavidDavid

              2,0906 silver badges10 bronze badges




              2,0906 silver badges10 bronze badges












              • $begingroup$
                Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
                $endgroup$
                – hazrmard
                4 hours ago




















              • $begingroup$
                Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
                $endgroup$
                – hazrmard
                4 hours ago


















              $begingroup$
              Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
              $endgroup$
              – hazrmard
              4 hours ago






              $begingroup$
              Ah! My understanding of the Nyquist theorem was lacking: sampling rate has to be 2 x the bandwidth, and not the highest frequency. In cases where the signal is in the baseband, the two coincide. But when we have a non-baseband signal (like a high-pass), we can still get away with downsampling as long as the rate satisfies the theorem with respect to the bandwidth.
              $endgroup$
              – hazrmard
              4 hours ago















              1












              $begingroup$

              The whole idea is that every level splits the image information in two equal halves, which can be represented by half the number of coefficient as the previous level, each.



              Otherwise, you'd not be doing much of a decomposition, would you?



              So, since you only need half of the coefficients (the rest is redundant), you just keep half of the coefficients. That's what the decimation stage does.






              share|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                1












                $begingroup$

                The whole idea is that every level splits the image information in two equal halves, which can be represented by half the number of coefficient as the previous level, each.



                Otherwise, you'd not be doing much of a decomposition, would you?



                So, since you only need half of the coefficients (the rest is redundant), you just keep half of the coefficients. That's what the decimation stage does.






                share|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  1












                  1








                  1





                  $begingroup$

                  The whole idea is that every level splits the image information in two equal halves, which can be represented by half the number of coefficient as the previous level, each.



                  Otherwise, you'd not be doing much of a decomposition, would you?



                  So, since you only need half of the coefficients (the rest is redundant), you just keep half of the coefficients. That's what the decimation stage does.






                  share|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  The whole idea is that every level splits the image information in two equal halves, which can be represented by half the number of coefficient as the previous level, each.



                  Otherwise, you'd not be doing much of a decomposition, would you?



                  So, since you only need half of the coefficients (the rest is redundant), you just keep half of the coefficients. That's what the decimation stage does.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 6 hours ago









                  Marcus MüllerMarcus Müller

                  12.7k4 gold badges15 silver badges33 bronze badges




                  12.7k4 gold badges15 silver badges33 bronze badges























                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      The classical discrete wavelet transform is critically decimated. In other words, it should preserve the quantity of "samples". In other words, apart from data border effects, the number of wavelet coefficients should be the same as the numer of data samples.



                      More generally, a critically-sampled, analysis multi-band filter bank with $M$ channels ($M=2$ for the DWT) is composed of $M$ filters $H_m$ in parallel, followed by downsampling factors $k_m$, such that $sum_{min{1ldots M}} 1/k_m=1$.



                      Invertible filter banks require the existence of a perfect synthesis filter bank. It is composed of $M$ filters $G_m$ in parallel, combined onto an output, preceded by the corresponding upsampling factors $k_m$. Input and output thus have the same global number of samples. But information is not lost only if certain conditions on the $H_m$ and $G_m$ are met.



                      Of course, with $M=1$, no subsampling is required (no aliasing), but if $H_1$ is not invertible, you will loose information. Moreover, if $H_1$ is FIR, is inverse is not (except for trivial cases).



                      The magic of wavelets is that, with $M=2$, there are many pairs of FIR filters such that, even if you downsample their output by $2$ and create aliasing, FIR synthesis filter bank exist. So 2-fold downsampling creates aliasing on both the low-pass and the high pass filter outputs (in fact, the high-pass output is shifted to the lower part of the spectrum). But the synthesis filter bank can cancel this aliasing.



                      Finally, for some well-chosen analysis and synthesis filters, even if aliasing occur in the middle, it is finally cancelled, Nyquist remains fulfilled.






                      share|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$


















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        The classical discrete wavelet transform is critically decimated. In other words, it should preserve the quantity of "samples". In other words, apart from data border effects, the number of wavelet coefficients should be the same as the numer of data samples.



                        More generally, a critically-sampled, analysis multi-band filter bank with $M$ channels ($M=2$ for the DWT) is composed of $M$ filters $H_m$ in parallel, followed by downsampling factors $k_m$, such that $sum_{min{1ldots M}} 1/k_m=1$.



                        Invertible filter banks require the existence of a perfect synthesis filter bank. It is composed of $M$ filters $G_m$ in parallel, combined onto an output, preceded by the corresponding upsampling factors $k_m$. Input and output thus have the same global number of samples. But information is not lost only if certain conditions on the $H_m$ and $G_m$ are met.



                        Of course, with $M=1$, no subsampling is required (no aliasing), but if $H_1$ is not invertible, you will loose information. Moreover, if $H_1$ is FIR, is inverse is not (except for trivial cases).



                        The magic of wavelets is that, with $M=2$, there are many pairs of FIR filters such that, even if you downsample their output by $2$ and create aliasing, FIR synthesis filter bank exist. So 2-fold downsampling creates aliasing on both the low-pass and the high pass filter outputs (in fact, the high-pass output is shifted to the lower part of the spectrum). But the synthesis filter bank can cancel this aliasing.



                        Finally, for some well-chosen analysis and synthesis filters, even if aliasing occur in the middle, it is finally cancelled, Nyquist remains fulfilled.






                        share|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$
















                          1












                          1








                          1





                          $begingroup$

                          The classical discrete wavelet transform is critically decimated. In other words, it should preserve the quantity of "samples". In other words, apart from data border effects, the number of wavelet coefficients should be the same as the numer of data samples.



                          More generally, a critically-sampled, analysis multi-band filter bank with $M$ channels ($M=2$ for the DWT) is composed of $M$ filters $H_m$ in parallel, followed by downsampling factors $k_m$, such that $sum_{min{1ldots M}} 1/k_m=1$.



                          Invertible filter banks require the existence of a perfect synthesis filter bank. It is composed of $M$ filters $G_m$ in parallel, combined onto an output, preceded by the corresponding upsampling factors $k_m$. Input and output thus have the same global number of samples. But information is not lost only if certain conditions on the $H_m$ and $G_m$ are met.



                          Of course, with $M=1$, no subsampling is required (no aliasing), but if $H_1$ is not invertible, you will loose information. Moreover, if $H_1$ is FIR, is inverse is not (except for trivial cases).



                          The magic of wavelets is that, with $M=2$, there are many pairs of FIR filters such that, even if you downsample their output by $2$ and create aliasing, FIR synthesis filter bank exist. So 2-fold downsampling creates aliasing on both the low-pass and the high pass filter outputs (in fact, the high-pass output is shifted to the lower part of the spectrum). But the synthesis filter bank can cancel this aliasing.



                          Finally, for some well-chosen analysis and synthesis filters, even if aliasing occur in the middle, it is finally cancelled, Nyquist remains fulfilled.






                          share|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          The classical discrete wavelet transform is critically decimated. In other words, it should preserve the quantity of "samples". In other words, apart from data border effects, the number of wavelet coefficients should be the same as the numer of data samples.



                          More generally, a critically-sampled, analysis multi-band filter bank with $M$ channels ($M=2$ for the DWT) is composed of $M$ filters $H_m$ in parallel, followed by downsampling factors $k_m$, such that $sum_{min{1ldots M}} 1/k_m=1$.



                          Invertible filter banks require the existence of a perfect synthesis filter bank. It is composed of $M$ filters $G_m$ in parallel, combined onto an output, preceded by the corresponding upsampling factors $k_m$. Input and output thus have the same global number of samples. But information is not lost only if certain conditions on the $H_m$ and $G_m$ are met.



                          Of course, with $M=1$, no subsampling is required (no aliasing), but if $H_1$ is not invertible, you will loose information. Moreover, if $H_1$ is FIR, is inverse is not (except for trivial cases).



                          The magic of wavelets is that, with $M=2$, there are many pairs of FIR filters such that, even if you downsample their output by $2$ and create aliasing, FIR synthesis filter bank exist. So 2-fold downsampling creates aliasing on both the low-pass and the high pass filter outputs (in fact, the high-pass output is shifted to the lower part of the spectrum). But the synthesis filter bank can cancel this aliasing.



                          Finally, for some well-chosen analysis and synthesis filters, even if aliasing occur in the middle, it is finally cancelled, Nyquist remains fulfilled.







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered 5 hours ago









                          Laurent DuvalLaurent Duval

                          17.3k3 gold badges21 silver badges66 bronze badges




                          17.3k3 gold badges21 silver badges66 bronze badges






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              Thanks for contributing an answer to Signal Processing Stack Exchange!


                              • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                              But avoid



                              • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                              • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                              Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                              To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fdsp.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f59013%2fwhy-is-the-high-pass-filter-result-in-a-discrete-wavelet-transform-dwt-downsam%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              Post as a guest















                              Required, but never shown





















































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown

































                              Required, but never shown














                              Required, but never shown












                              Required, but never shown







                              Required, but never shown







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Taj Mahal Inhaltsverzeichnis Aufbau | Geschichte | 350-Jahr-Feier | Heutige Bedeutung | Siehe auch |...

                              Baia Sprie Cuprins Etimologie | Istorie | Demografie | Politică și administrație | Arii naturale...

                              Nicolae Petrescu-Găină Cuprins Biografie | Opera | In memoriam | Varia | Controverse, incertitudini...