\section{Acknowledgement}
This work was supported in part by the Sichuan Science and Technology Program, China, under grants No.2020YFS0057, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities under Project ZYGX2019Z015.
\bibliographystyle{splncs04}

\section{The proposed light-weight Hourglass network}
\subsection{Hourglass network}
Although Hourglass network  has been utilized in many human pose estimation methods \cite{zhang2019fast,nie2018human,nie2018pose,nie2019single}, it is hard to been adapted in practical applications due to its large model size. Original Hourglass network consists of eight stacked hourglass modules, whose structure is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:1}.
The ResBlock used in original Hourglass network has a bottleneck structure (Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(a)). In this paper, we try to improve the efficiency of Hourglass network by replacing the original ResBlocks with the light-weight ones (Fig.~\ref{fig:1}).
The proposed Hourglass network is called DS-Hourglass network. More details are given as follows.

\begin{figure}[!t]
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=12cm]{images/hourglass2.png}
    \caption{An illustration of a Hourglass module, ``/2'' means downsampling operation and ``x2'' means upsampling operation.
}\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=12cm]{images/residual_37.png}
    \caption{Architecture of the ResBlocks. (a) The original ResBlock in Hourglass\cite{newell2016stacked}. (b) another kind of ResBlock proposed in ResNet\cite{he2016deep}. (c) DS-ResBlock corresponding to (b), (d) replace the DWConv in (c) with Mix-Cov.
}\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Depthwise Separable Convolutions}
A depthwise separable convolution decomposes a standard convolutional operation into a depthwise convolution (capture the spatial correlation) followed by a pointwise convolution (capture the cross-channel correlation).

A standard convolution operation needs $ c_{1} \times c_{2} \times k \times k$ parameters and about $ h\times w \times c_{1} \times c_{2} \times  k \times k$ computational cost, where $h\times w$, $c_{1}/c_{2}$ and $k\times k$ are the spatial size of input and output feature maps, the number of input/output feature channels and the convolutional kernel size, respectively. While a depthwise separable convolution operation only needs $ c_{1} \times k \times k + c_{1}\times c_{2}$ parameters and about $ h\times w \times c_{1} (k^2 + c_{2})$ computational cost. For example, if we set $k$ to 3 and $c_{2}$ to 128, the number of parameters and the computational cost of the depthwise separable convolution is only about $1/9$ of the corresponding standard convolution.

\subsection{Light-weight ResBlock}
To develop efficient ResBlock, we first reduce the number of its input/output feature channels from 256 to 128, and use two stacked $3\times 3$ convolutions (Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(b)). Then, we replace the two standard $3\times 3$ convolutions with two depthwise separable convolutions followed with a squeeze-and-excitation (SE) block to get a light-weight ResBlock (Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(c)). The SE block is very efficicent and used to relocate features and strengthen features. To capture the information of different scales, we further replace the depthwise convolution with a mixed depthwise convolution (MixConv~\cite{tan2019mixconv}) to get another version of light-weight ResBlock (Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(d)). In MixConv, the input feature channels are first split into groups, then depthwise convolutions with different kernel sizes are applied to different groups, finally, the output of each depthwise convolution are concatenated. In this paper, we apply kernels of $3\times 3$ and $5\times 5$ to two groups of channels respectively to trade-off the representation capability and the computational costs. In our study, we found that adding a skip connection around the second depthwise separable convolution can make the training of this ResBlock (Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(d)) more stable.

\section{Multi-Person Pose Estimation}
\begin{figure}[!t]
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=12cm]{images/pipline_final.png}
    \caption{Our pipeline. Our method takes color image as input, the DS-Hourglass build with 8 stage and predict 2 sets, heatmaps and offsetmaps, finally return joints for each person in image at once by our efficient joint grouping algorithm.}\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{fig:3} illustrates the overall pipeline of our network. Our multi-person pose estimation method first predicts joints of all person at once, then the joint candidates are grouped into different persons.
To improve the efficiency of joint grouping, a rooted tree is used to represent human pose by using person centroid as the root which
connecting to all the joints directly or hierarchically. Another network branch is used to predict the offset from each joint to its parent node.
The person centroid is treated as a pseudo joint and predicted together with body joints.  After that, body joints are grouped by tracing along their offsets to the closed centroids.

\begin{figure}[!t]
    \centering
    \includegraphics[width=6.5cm,height=4.5cm]{images/tree_im3.png}
    \caption{Pose representations: (a) kinematic structure; (b) centroid-rooted tree; (c) heirarchical centroid-rooted tree}\label{fig:4}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Centroid-rooted tree structure to define the offsets}
The centroid-rooted tree structure is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:4}(b), where the person centriod (root node) directly connect to all body joints (leaf nodes).
The drawback of this representation is that it leads to some long-range offsets which are hard to be precisely predicted, e.g. from ankle, knee and wrist to the centroid.
To alleviate this problem, we further proposed a hierarchical centroid-rooted tree (Fig.~\ref{fig:4}(c)) based on the kinematic structure (Fig.~\ref{fig:4}(a)), where the long-range offsets are decomposed into short-range or middle-range offsets.

\subsection{Joint and Offset Prediction}
Our network has two branches of sub-networks for joint and offset prediction. Both sub-networks have only one $1\times 1$ convolution and share the same feature maps  from  hourglass module.

\textbf{Joint Prediction}. Our groud-truth heatmap is generated according to following equation,
\begin{equation}
H_{j}(x,y)=min(\sum_{i=1}^{N}exp(-\frac{((x,y)-(x_{j}^{i},y_{j}^{i}))^{2}}{2\sigma ^{2}}),1),
\end{equation}
where  $(x_{j}^{i},y_{j}^{i})$ is the coordinate of joint $j$ of person $i$, $N$ is the number of person in the image and $\sigma $ controls the spread of the peak, and minimum function is used to guarantee the value not greater than 1.

\textbf{Offset Prediction}.  we construct a dense offset map for each body joint as the ground-truth for offset prediction. We first construct a offset map $O_j^i$ for joint $j$ of person $i$ as:
\begin{equation}
O_{j}^{i}(x, y)=\left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\frac{1}{Z}((x_{c}^{i}, y_{c}^{i})-(x, y)) & \text { if }(x, y) \in N_{j}^{i} \\
0 & \text { otherwise }
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
where $ N_{j}^{i}=\left \{ (x,y)| \sqrt{(x,y)-(x_{j}^{i},y_{j}^{i}) }\leq \tau  \right \}$  denotes the area of neighbors of joint $j$ of person $i$, $(x_{c}^{i},y_{c}^{i})$ is the coordinate of the centroid of the person $i$, $ Z=\frac{1}{2}min(W,H) $ is a normalization coefficient, $ W $ and $ H $ are the width and height of the input image. If a location belongs to multiple people, these vectors are averaged. If the hierarchical centroid-rooted tree is used to represent human pose, we only need to replace the centroid in equation (2) with the parent node of the joint $j$ of the person $i$.

The MSE Loss is used for joint prediction, and Smooth L1-Loss is used for offset prediction.

\subsection{Centroid-guided joint grouping} Based on the predicted person centroids, we develop a greedy method for joint grouping. First, we apply NMS to the heatmaps of the last stage of DS-Hourglass to get the coordinates of all candidate joints, and sort them in descending order of their score.
For the centroid-rooted tree representation, joint allocation is performed independently for each body joint. Given a candidate of joint $j$, its centroid's coordinate can be predicated as
\begin{equation}
(\hat{x},\hat{y})_c = (x,y) + Z\times O_j(x,y),
\end{equation} where $(x,y)$ is the coordinate of the candidate joint, $(\hat{x},\hat{y})_c$ is the predicated coordinate of its person centroid, and $O_j$ is the offset map of joint $j$.
Then the predicated centroid is compared to each person centroid generated from heatmap and allocated to the nearest one under the constrain that one person has only one instance for each joint category.

For hierarchical centroid-rooted tree representation, the joints are also
group-
ed hierarchically. Base on the intuition that the joints close to the torso can be predicted more reliably. We classify joints into three levels, the first level contains \textit{shoulder}, \textit{hip}, and \textit{neck}, the second level contains \textit{head}, \textit{elbow} and \textit{knee}, and third level contains \textit{wirst} and \textit{ankle}. The joint allocation is performed from the first level to the third level, each joint candidate is associated to its parent node in the tree structure according to equation (3) and the nearest-neighbour rule.

\section{Related Works}

\subsection{Efficient Neural Networks}
To adopt deep neural networks in real-time applications and/or on resource-constrained devices, many research works have been devoted to build efficient neural networks with acceptable performance. Depthwise separable convolution was originally presented in~\cite{sifre2014rigid}. It can achieve a good balance between the representation capability and computational efficiency, and  has been utilized as the key building block in many successful efficient CNNs, such as Xception~\cite{chollet2017xception}, MobileNets~\cite{howard2017mobilenets,sandler2018mobilenetv2} and ENAS~\cite{pham2018efficient}. MixConv~\cite{tan2019mixconv} extends vanilla depthwise convolution by partitioning channels into multiple groups and apply different kernel sizes to each of them, and achieves better representation capability.

\subsection{Multi-person pose estimation}
\textbf{Top-down methods}. Top-down multi-person pose estimation methods first detect people by a human detector (\emph{e.g.} Faster-RCNN\cite{ren2015faster} ), then run a single-person pose estimator on the cropped image of each person to get the final pose predictions. Representative top-down methods include PoseNet~\cite{papandreou2017towards}, RMPE~\cite{fang2017rmpe}, Mask R-CNN~\cite{he2017mask}, CPN~\cite{chen2018cascaded} and MSRA~\cite{xiao2018simple}. However, top-down methods depend heavily on the human detector, and their inference time will significantly increase if many people appear together.

\textbf{Bottom-up methods}. Bottom-up methods detect the human joints of all persons at once, and then allocate these joints to each person based on various joint grouping methods. However, they suffer from very high complexity of joint grouping step, which usually involves solving a NP-hard graph partition problem. DeepCut~\cite{pishchulin2016deepcut} and DeeperCut~\cite{insafutdinov2016deepercut} solve the joint grouping with an integer linear program which results in the order of hours to process a single image. Later works drastically reduce prediction time by using greedy decoders in combination with additional tools. Cao~\emph{et~al.}~\cite{cao2017realtime} proposed part affinity fields to encode location and orientation of limbs. Newell and Deng~\cite{newell2017associative} presented the associative embedding for grouping joint candidates. PPN~\cite{nie2018pose} performs dense regressions from global joint candidates within a embedding space of person centroids to generate person detection and joint grouping. But it need to adopt the Agglomerative Clustering algorithm~\cite{bourdev2009poselets} to determine the person centroids. In this paper, we avoid the time-consuming clustering by regressing the person centroids together with body joints and using them to guide the joint grouping.

Recently, Nie~\emph{et~al.}~\cite{nie2019single} proposed a one-stage multi-person pose estimation method (SPM) which predicts root joints (person centroids) and joint displacements directly. Although both SPM and our method predict person centroid, they use centroid plus displacements to recover joints and we use centroid to guide joint grouping. We argue that joints can be predicted more precisely than its displacements.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we develop a light-weight Hourglass network by applying depthwise separable convolution and mixed depthwise convolution. The new network can be directly applied to single-person pose estimation. Based on this backbone network, we further proposed an efficient multi-person pose estimation method. Both our single-person and multi-person pose estimation methods can achieve competitive accuracies on public datasets with low computational costs.

\section{Introduction}
Human pose estimation aims to locate human body joints from a single monocular image. It is a challenge and fundamental task  in many visual applications, e.g. surveillance, autonomous driving, human-computer interaction, etc.  In the last few years, considerable progress on human pose estimation has been achieved by deep learning based approaches~\cite{newell2016stacked,xiao2018simple,sun2019deep,nie2018pose,nie2019single,zhang2019fast}.

Most existing research works on human pose estimation focus on improving the accuracy and develop deep networks with large model size and low computational efficiency, which prohibits their practical application. To adopt deep networks in real-time applications and/or on limited resource devices, the model should be compact and computational efficient. Inception module~\cite{szegedy2016rethinking} is used to build deeper networks without increase model size and computational cost.
Depthwise separable convolution~\cite{chollet2017xception,howard2017mobilenets,tan2019mixconv}, has been utilized as the key building block in many successful efficient CNNs.
In this paper, we follow these successful design principles to develop efficient deep networks for human pose estimation.

For multi-person pose estimation, it is needed to distinguishing poses of different persons. The approaches can mainly be divided into two categories: top-down strategy and bottom-up strategy. The top-down approaches~\cite{papandreou2017towards,iqbal2016multi,fang2017rmpe,xiao2018simple,sun2019deep} employ detectors to localize person instances and then apply joint detector to each person instance. Each step of top-down approaches requires a very large amount of calculations, and the run-time of the second step is proportional to the number of person. In contrast, the bottom-up approaches~\cite{papandreou2018personlab,pishchulin2016deepcut,levinkov2017joint,insafutdinov2016deepercut,insafutdinov2017arttrack,cao2017realtime} detect all the body joints for only once and then group/allocate them into different persons. However, they suffer from very high complexity of joint grouping step, which usually involves solving a NP-hard graph partition problem. Different methods have been proposed to reduce the grouping time. Recently, some one-stage multi-person pose estimation approaches~\cite{nie2019single,sekii2018pose,tian2019directpose} have been proposed, but their performance lag behind the two-stage ones. In this paper, we also focus on the bottom-up strategy.

In this paper, we propose efficient and effective methods for 2D human pose estimation. A new ResBlock is proposed with two depthwise separable convolutions and a squeeze-and-excitation (SE) module and utilized in place of the original ResBlock in Hourglass network. Its representation capability is further enhanced by replacing the vanilla depthwise convolution with a mixed depthwise convolution. The new Hourglass networks is very light-weighted and can be directly applied to single-person pose estimation.
Base on this backbone network, we further propose a new bottom-up multi-person pose estimation method. A rooted tree is used to represent human pose by introducing person centroid as the root which connecting to all the joints directly or hierarchically. Two branches of sub-networks are used to predict the centroids, body joints and their offsets to their parent nodes. Joints are grouped by tracing along their offsets to the closest centroids. Our single-person pose estimation method is evaluated on MPII Human Pose dataset~\cite{andriluka20142d} and Leeds Sports Pose dataset~\cite{johnson2010clustered}. It achieves competitive accuracy with only 4.7 GFLOPs.
Our multi-person pose estimation method is evaluated on MPII Human Pose Multi-Person dataset~\cite{andriluka20142d}, and achieves competitive accuracy with only 13.6 GFLOPs.

\section{Experiments}
\begin{table}[!t]
 \caption{Comparison of ResBlocks on MPII single-person validation set}
  \centering

  \begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c}

  \hline
  Methods &Mean &Stages& Param &FLOPs\\

\hline
  \hline
  Hourglass~\cite{newell2016stacked}&90.52&8&26M&26.2G\\
  SBN~\cite{xiao2018simple}&89.6&-&68.6M&21G\\
  HRNet~\cite{sun2019deep}&90.3&-&28.5M&9.5G\\
  FPD~\cite{zhang2019fast}&89.04&4&3M&3.6G\\
  \hline
  DS-Hourglass*&88.71&8&2.9M&3.3G\\
  DS-Hourglass w/o SE&89.47&8&2.9M&4.7G\\
  DS-Hourglass&89.87&8&4.2M&4.7G\\
  DS-Hourglass(mix)&89.94&8&4.6M&4.8G\\
      \hline
  \end{tabular}
  \label{tab:table1}
\end{table}
\subsection{Experiment setup}
\textbf{Datasets} MPII Single-Person Dataset consists of around 25k images with annotations for multiple people providing 40k annotated samples (28k training, 11k testing) for single-person pose estimation. The MPII Multi-Person dataset consists of 3,844 and 1,758 groups of multiple interacting persons for training and testing. The LSP dataset has 11K training samples and 1K test samples, with 14 annotated joints for a person.

\textbf{Training Details} We randomly augmente the samples with rotation degrees in [-40, 40], scaling factors in [0.7, 1.3], translation offset in [-40, 40] and horizontally mirror, adopt $256\times 256$ as training size.
The initial learning rate is 0.0025,  learning rate decay at step 150, 170, 200 and 230 with total 250 epochs by 0.5.

\subsection{Ablation Study}
\textbf{Ablation for ResBlocks} In Table 1, DS-Hourglass* uses  Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(c) with only one depthwise separable convolution. DS-Hourglass w/o SE uses  Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(c) without SE module. DS-Hourglass and DS-Hourglass(mix) use  Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(c) and Fig.~\ref{fig:2}(d) respectively. ResBlock with two depthwise separable convolution can improve 1.1\% in PCKh than ResBlock with only one, but with 1.4 GFLOPs computational cost increased. SE model can imporve 0.4\% in PCKh; Mixed depthwise convolution only bring very little improvement for single-person pose estimation. Compared with the excellent methods, our DS-Hourglass(mix) is 0.9\% higher than FPD. And 0.36\% lower than HRNet~\cite{sun2019deep}, However, the GFLOPs is only half of it and the parameters are only 16\% of HRNet.

\textbf{Ablation for Assembly methods} Table 2 indicated that our centroid-guided method improves 0.4\% over PPN, and our hierarchical centroid-guided method improves 1.8\% over PPN. DS-Hourglass(mix) improves 1\% over DS-Hourgalss with hierarchical centroid-guided assembly method, as it can handles multi-scale problem better, even better than PPN~\cite{nie2018pose} based on original Hourglass one (79.8\% vs 79.4\%), we can save 50GFLOPs and only need 21\% parameters of PPN.

\begin{table}[!t]
 \caption{Comparison of assembly methods on MPII multi-person validation set}
  \centering
  \begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c|c}

  \hline
  Model&Stage &Method&Mean & Param &FLOPs\\

    \hline
  \hline

  Hourglass &8&PPN~\cite{nie2018pose}&79.4&22M&62.9G\\
  \hline

  Hourglass&1&PPN&74.4&3.0M&10.8G\\
  Hourglass&1&Center&75.8&3.0M&10.9G\\
  Hourglass&1&Cent.Hier.&76.2&3.0M&10.9G\\
  \hline

  DS-Hourglass&8&Cent.Hier.&78.8&4.4M&13.3G\\
  DS-Hourglass(mix)&8&Cent.Hier.&79.8&4.6M&13.6G\\

      \hline
  \end{tabular}

  \label{tab:table2}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!t]

\begin{center}
\caption{Result on MPII Single-Person test set. $*$ means the use of extend dataset.}
\label{table:headings}
\begin{tabular}{c||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
    Method & PCKh  & \textbf{Auxiliaries}& Stage&\textbf{Pre.} &Input size & Out. size & FLOPs & \#Param   \\
\hline
\hline

DeeperCut~\cite{insafutdinov2016deepercut}& 88.5  &-  &-&yes& $344\times 344$  & $ 43 \times 43 $  & 37G & 66M  \\
CPM*~\cite{Wei2016Convolutional}& 88.5   &- &6 &yes&$368 \times 368 $  & $46 \times 46 $  & 175G  & 31M   \\
SHG~\cite{newell2016stacked}&  90.9   &- & 8&no&$256 \times 256 $  & $ 64 \times 64 $  & 26.2G  & 26M  \\
PIL~\cite{nie2018human}&\textbf{92.4}  & Segment & 8&no&$ 256 \times 256 $ & $64 \times 64 $&  29.2G &26.4M\\
Sekii~\cite{sekii2018pose}&88.1&-&-&yes&$384 \times 384$ & $12 \times 12$ &6G&16M\\
FPD~\cite{zhang2019fast}&91.1  &
Know. dist. &4 &yes&$ 256 \times 256 $&$ 64 \times 64 $ &\textbf{3.6G} &\textbf{3.2M}\\
HRNet~\cite{sun2019deep}&92.3&-&-&yes&$ 256 \times 256 $&$ 64 \times 64 $&9.5G&28.5M\\
\hline
\hline
\textbf{DS-Hourglass}& 91.5   &- & 8 &no&$ 256 \times 256 $&$ 64 \times 64 $  & 4.7G  & 4.2M \\

\hline
\end{tabular}

\end{center}
\end{table}

\subsection{Comparisons to State-Of-The-Art Methods}

\textbf{MPII Single-Person dataset} From Table 3, we can find that our method is very lightweight and efficient. Our model has greatly reduced the deployment cost, while still achieving a high PCKh of 91.5\%. Compared our method with the best performer, PIL~\cite{nie2018human}, the DS-Hourglass needs only 16\% of its computational cost but has only 0.9\% drop in PCKh. Our method outperforms FPD~\cite{zhang2019fast} (91.5\% vs 91.1\% AP) which needs  knowledge distillation and pretrained weights.

\textbf{LSP dataset}
Our method also achieve the 90.8\% PCK@0.2 accuracy on LSP dataset which is same as FPD~\cite{zhang2019fast}, without using extra dataset. Because space is limited, the comparison is not listed in the form of a table.

\textbf{MPII Multi-Person dataset} In Table 4, we compare our method with the leading methods in recent years. It should be noted that our method does not use single-person pose estimation to refine the results. Research works~\cite{cao2017realtime,nie2018pose} have reported that the single-pose refinement can improve the result by about 2.6\%. However, the refinement is always time-consuming, so we did not use it. We get very competitive result 77.4\% achieve the state-of-the-art among the methods without refinement. Our model has only 4.6M parameters and needs 13.6 GFLOPs when using input size of $384\times 384$. To best of our knowledge, PPN~\cite{nie2018pose} is the state-of-the-art on MPII Multi-Person dataset, from our ablation Table 2, we can find that our method is better than PPN, and our method can reduced the computational cost by approximately 50GFLOPs.

Table 5 lists the results on MPII 288 test set, and our method gets 81.0\%, only 0.3\% lower than the best one~\cite{fieraru2018learning} which uses refinement. It can be found that our method has great advantages in the distal part of the body (\emph{e.g.} wrist, knee, ankle, \emph{etc}), as we use hierarchical centroid-rooted tree to avoid long-range offset predction.

\begin{table}[!t]
 \caption{Results on the Full MPII Multi-Person test set.}
  \centering

  \begin{tabular}{c||ccccccc||cc}
      \hline
  Methods &Head & Shoulder & Elbow & Wrist & Hip & Knee  & Ankle & Total&\textbf{Refine.} \\
      \hline
      \hline

      CMU-Pose~\cite{cao2017realtime} & 91.2  & 87.6  & 77.7  & 66.8  & 75.4  & 68.9 & 61.7 & 75.6 &yes\\
      AE-Pose~\cite{newell2017associative} &92.1  & 89.3  & 78.9  & 69.8  & 76.2  & 71.6 & 64.7 & 77.5 &yes\\
      RefinePose~\cite{fieraru2018learning}& 91.8  & 89.5  & 80.4  & 69.6  & 77.3  & 71.7 & 65.5 & 78.0&yes\\
      PPN~\cite{nie2018pose}&92.2 &89.7&82.1&74.4&78.6&76.4&69.3&80.4&yes\\
      SPM~\cite{nie2019single}&89.7 &87.4 &80.4 &72.4 &76.7 &74.9 &68.3&78.5&yes\\
      \hline
      \hline
      DeepCut~\cite{pishchulin2016deepcut} & 73.4 &71.8 &57.9 &39.9 &56.7 &44.0 &32.0 &54.1&no\\
      DeeperCut~\cite{insafutdinov2016deepercut} &89.4 &84.5 &70.4 &59.3 &68.9 &62.7 &54.6 &70.0&no\\
      Levinkov~\emph{et~al.}~\cite{levinkov2017joint}& 89.8  & 85.2  & 71.8  & 59.6  & 71.1  & 63.0 & 53.5 & 70.6 &no\\
      ArtTrack~\cite{insafutdinov2017arttrack} &88.8  & 87.0  & 75.9  & 64.9  & 74.2  & 68.8 & 60.5 & 74.3&no\\

      RMPE~\cite{fang2017rmpe} & 88.4  & 86.5  & 78.6  & 70.4  & 74.4  & 73.0 & \textbf{65.8} & 76.7 &no\\

      Sekii~\cite{sekii2018pose}&\textbf{93.9} &\textbf{90.2} &\textbf{79.0} &\textbf{68.7}&74.8&68.7&60.5 &76.6&no\\

      \hline
      \textbf{DS-hourglass(mix)}& 91.6  & 88.3  & 78.0  & 68.3  & \textbf{77.9}  & \textbf{72.5} & 65.1 & \textbf{77.4} &no\\

          \hline
  \end{tabular}

  \label{tab:table3}
\end{table}

\begin{table}[!t]
 \caption{Results on a set of 288 images from MPII Multi-Person test set.}
  \centering
  \begin{tabular}{c||ccccccc||cc}
  \hline
  Methods &Head & Shoulder & Elbow & Wrist & Hip & Knee  & Ankle & Total&\textbf{Refine.}\\
    \hline
  \hline
  CMU-Pose~\cite{cao2017realtime}& 92.9  & 91.3  & 82.3  & 72.6  & 76.0  & 70.9 & 66.8 & 79.0&yes\\
  AE-Pose~\cite{newell2017associative}&91.5	&87.2&	75.9&	65.4&	72.2&	67.0&	62.1&	74.5&yes\\
  RefinePose~\cite{fieraru2018learning}& 93.8  & 91.6  & 83.9  & 75.2  & 78.0  & 75.6 & 70.7 & 81.3&yes\\
  \hline
  \hline
  DeepCut~\cite{pishchulin2016deepcut}& 73.1  & 71.7  & 58.0  & 39.9  & 56.1  & 43.5 & 31.9 & 53.5 &no\\
  Iqbal and Gall~\cite{iqbal2016multi}& 70.0  & 65.2  & 56.4  & 46.1  & 52.7  & 47.9 & 44.5 & 54.7 &no\\

  DeeperCut~\cite{insafutdinov2016deepercut}& 92.1  & 88.5  & 76.4  & 67.8  & 73.6  & 68.7 & 62.3 & 75.6&no\\
  ArtTrack~\cite{insafutdinov2017arttrack}& 92.2  & 91.3  & 80.8  & 71.4  & 79.1  & 72.6 & 67.8 & 79.3&no\\

  RMPE~\cite{fang2017rmpe}& 89.4  & 88.5  & 81.0  & 75.4  & 73.7  & 75.4 & 66.5 & 78.6&no\\
  Sekii~\cite{sekii2018pose}&\textbf{95.2} &\textbf{92.2}& \textbf{83.2}&73.8&74.8&71.3&63.4&79.1&no\\

    \hline
\textbf{DS-Hourglass(mix)}& 93.2  & 91.1  & 81.5  & \textbf{74.7}  & \textbf{81.0}  & \textbf{75.5} & \textbf{70.2} & \textbf{81.0} &no\\

      \hline
  \end{tabular}

  \label{tab:table4}
\end{table}


\section{Introduction}

The first protocol of Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) was proposed in 1984 by Bennet and Brassard \cite{BB1984}. Today, commercial fiber-based systems are available with operational distances steadily increasing \cite{Zbinden2018}\cite{Fang2020}. Recently, QKD has also been realized between the Chinese satellite Micius and ground-stations \cite{Micius2017}\cite{Micius2020}. Currently, there are several national initiatives to deploy a QKD network, including terrestrial and space links. In particular, there is an increasing and unprecedented interest in space telecommunication networks; our scenarios of interest as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:OWsecrecy_QT}, (this work focuses on the blue link).

A QKD protocol assumes that two distant legitimate parties, Alice and Bob have at their disposal the following resources: Secure offices, access to an untrusted quantum channel and an authenticated classical public channel, and perfectly random numbers. A potential eavesdropper, Eve, has the complete control of the quantum channel. In particular, she can intercept all quantum states and perform any measurement allowed by quantum mechanics, including entangling the states with some auxiliary system and store them in perfect quantum memories. Moreover, she can send signals to Bob over a lossless channel. Despite this extreme power only limited by the laws of quantum physics, QKD protocols are now well established and furnished with security proofs \cite{Shor2000}\cite{Mayers2001}\cite{Kato2016}\cite{Curty2019}. So the generated keys guarantee together with the encoding using the one-time-pad information theoretically secure communication \cite{Renner2005}\cite{Scarani2009}.

\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.28]{imagesDraft/scenarios_1}
\protect\caption{Our scenarios of interest: celestial mechanics dictates orbit dynamics for legitimate parties and eavesdroppers.}
\label{fig:OWsecrecy_QT}
\end{figure}

Alternatively, physical-layer-security relies also on information theoretical principles in the sense that Eve has unlimited computing power. However, she has a physical disadvantage with respect to the legitimate users. In particular, Eve can intercept only a fraction of the signal sent by Alice. In 1975,  Wyner first proposed a protocol based on a so-called degraded wiretap channel (for a  classical channel)\cite{Wyner1975}\cite{WynerPoisson}\cite{WynerPoisson-1}. The information leakage to the eavesdropper is determined with an information theoretical measure, which has been strengthened from Wyner's (weak) security to the so called strong security criterion by I.~Csisz\'ar and J.~K\"orner, \cite{Csiszar1978} and Maurer \cite{Maurer1993} until achieving cryptographic semantic security \cite{Bellare2012}.
In a quantum setting, where Alice and Bob use an authenticated quantum channel for (keyless) secure direct communication, the asymptotically achievable rate, the private capacity, subject to the strong security criterion, was determined by Cai, Winter and Yeung in \cite{Cai2004} and Devetak in \cite{Devetak2005}\cite{Devetak2005-1}.

On the one hand, QKD with satellites is extremely challenging due to the small signal strength of the order of one photon per pulse, the high channel loss, delays due to the iterative protocol, and the sensitivity to background noise, which does not allow key exchanges during daytime. On the other hand, eavesdropping without being noticed seems to be very complicated as well in a free-space scenario. So it makes a lot of sense to consider a few reasonable assumptions which limit the power of Eve. Indeed, due to the laws of celestial mechanics a satellite cannot be parked in the line of sight between Alice's satellite and Bob's ground-station (or satellite), which prevents intercept and resend attacks. Eve could  position her satellite very close or eventually attach it to Alice's satellite. This would allow Eve to exploit side channels (e.g. monitoring electronic signals), but this scenario is excluded in QKD which relies by definition on secure offices. Similarly, Eve could place a telescope close to Bob's but again we may introduce an exclusion region under control of Bob, within which Eve cannot install a big telescope.

There is some initial work investigating the consequences of restricted power for Eve on the performance of QKD links \cite{Shapiro2019}\cite{Shapiro2019-1}\cite{Ling2019}\cite{Fujiwara2018}. However, given their additional, reasonable assumptions, we find exactly the scenario where keyless private communication is possible. This type of secret transmission and its practical comparison with QKD have been studied in \cite{Endo2015}\cite{Endo2016}, however, without  assuming a quantum channel.

In this paper, we show that physical layer encryption is a reasonable choice for satellite communication over the quantum space channel. In Section II, we introduce the one-way wiretap protocol and identify its asymptotic information-theoretical secure and reliable rate: the private capacity. In Section III, we propose a simple yet accurate channel model using binary modulated coherent states (on-off keying, OOK) and derive and analyze the private capacity for Bob using realistic, state-of-the-art photon counting detectors while the signal reception by Eve being only limited by the laws of physics. Finally, we present numerical results for a realistic scenario taking the performance of the Micius system as a reference and compare it to the fundamental limit for the secret key rate of QKD \cite{PLOB2017}.

\section{Description of the protocol}

Our protocol is based on the one-way wiretap protocol \cite{Wyner1975}\cite{Csiszar1978} where secret bits are channel encoded and sent over $n$ uses of the optical channel. We assume OOK for lighter analytical treatment, but other binary modulations can be used e.g. Binary Phase Shift Keying (BPSK).

The protocol contains the following steps.
\begin{enumerate}

\item \textbf{Encoding.} Alice, the legitimate information transmitter, sends a stream of secret information bits (any data, video, pictures, etc.) to a stochastic wiretap encoder. Information-theoretically, this encoding is described as Alice selects a codeword $X^n$ to send her secret message $M$. The signal is meant for Bob, but part of it is leaked to the environment represented by the omnipresent Eve. The secrecy depends on the structure of this encoder,
which is characterized by the rate $R=k/n$ (where $k$ is the number of secret bits), the error probability, $\epsilon_n$, and a security measure, $\delta_n$.

\item \textbf{State Preparation.} For each use of the channel, the legitimate information transmitter (Alice), prepares a coherent state modulated by the random variable $X \in \mathcal{X}=\{0,1\}$, where $X=0$ with probability $q$ and $X=1$ with probability $1-q$. The OOK states transmitted by Alice are the vacuum state, $\ket{\alpha_0} = \ket{0}$, and
\begin{align}
\ket{\alpha_1} &= e^{-\frac{1}{2}|\alpha_1|^2} \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{\alpha_1^n}{(n!)^{1/2}}\ket{n}.
\end{align}
The probability $q$ is not decided \emph{a priori} as part of the protocol, it needs to be optimized depending on the assumptions at the detection and the physical propagation channel (Section III).

\item \textbf{Measurement.} After $n$ transmissions over the quantized propagating field, Bob receives $B^n$ and Eve $E^n$. Bob estimates his received coherent state after measuring the arriving light and obtains $Y^n$. He disposes of state-of-the-art detectors. Eve may apply the best quantum detection strategy to obtain $Z^n$.

\item \textbf{Decoding.} Bob and Eve send their estimated received states to the decoder. The concrete construction of encoder and decoder are assumed to be publicly known. The  values of $\epsilon_n$ and $\delta_n$ depend on the choice of this code.

\end{enumerate}

According to the wiretap theory, even if the eavesdropper is computationally unbounded, the wiretap code ensures that if $R$ is an achievable rate, both $\epsilon_n$ and $\delta_n$ (after decoding) tend to zero for large $n$,
\begin{align}
\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \epsilon_n = \lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \delta_n &= 0,
\end{align}
which means that the error probability and the information leakage towards Eve can be made arbitrarily low. Upper bounds are also known for the speed of convergence rate of leaked information \cite{Hayashi2015}. Hence, the protocol jointly provides information-theoretical reliable and secure communication. The supremum of all such rates is called the private capacity and for the classical-quantum wiretap channel subject to the strong security criterion, has been determined in \cite{Cai2004}\cite{Devetak2005}. The meaning of strong security is that, given a uniform distribution of the message to be transmitted through the channel, the eavesdropper shall obtain no information about it \cite{Maurer1994}. This criterion is the most common security criterion in classical and quantum information theory. The metric of strong security is the amount of mutual information leaked to Eve.

When Bob's channel is degradable, the private capacity of the quantum wiretap protocol (with quantum channel and information) is \cite{Devetak2005-1}\cite{Smith2008}\cite{Wilde2018}
\begin{align}
C_P(\mathcal{N}) =  \sup_{\rho_{in}} I_c(\rho_{in},\mathcal{N}),
\label{PriCapFormula}
\end{align}
where $\rho_{in}$ is the input density matrix and $ I_c(\rho_{in},\mathcal{N})$ is the coherent information defined as
\begin{align}
I_c(\rho_{in},\mathcal{N})= S(\mathcal{N}_{B}(\rho_{in})-S(\mathcal{N}_{E}(\rho_{in})),
\end{align} \label{eq:CoherentInfo}
with $S$ the von Neumann entropy. In the next sections we characterize the degradable channel of our practical (energy-constrained) protocol over space links, which we use to derive the private capacity.
\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.2]{imagesDraft/WiretapModel1}
\protect\caption{The main channel and the wiretap channel (top) and the information-theoretical representation of the degraded classical-quantum channel (bottom).}
\label{fig:sysmodel}
\end{figure}

The (physical) description of our protocol is illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:sysmodel} (top). The figure shows encoded bits modulating coherent states, the quantum channel $\mathcal{N}=(\mathcal{N}_B,\mathcal{N}_E)$, the resulting classical channel after detection $N=(N_B,N_E)$ as well as the information theoretical representation (bottom).

\section{Calculation of the private capacity $C_{P}$}

First, we build a model for the classical-quantum channel of our protocol. The legitimate transmitter, Alice, is on a satellite while the legitimate receiver, Bob, is on Earth. We assume a single-mode free-space quantum bosonic channel (for the wiretap channel in the semi-classical regime see \cite{Hayashi2020}).  The overall efficiency of Bob's channel is $\eta$. The coefficient $\gamma \in (0,1)$ characterizes the channel degradation. Hence, the efficiency of Eve's channel is $\gamma\eta$.

According to step 2 of our protocol, the received states are simply the vacuum, or $\ket{\sqrt{\eta}\alpha_1}$  and $\ket{\sqrt{\eta\gamma}\alpha_1}$ for Bob and Eve respectively. The wiretap channel transition probabilities depend on the coherent states received by Bob and Eve and by their detection strategies. For practical purposes, we assume Bob uses standard single photon detectors, i.e. a threshold detector.
For Bob, we also take into account limited detection efficiency (included in $\eta$, see Appendix \ref{sec:App4}) and noise (dark counts probability $p_{dark}$ and stray light with a Poisson photon number distribution and average $\eta_0\Delta$). The conditional probabilities that Bob detects $y$ given that Alice sent $x$ are illustrated in Fig. 3 with $\epsilon_0=(1-p_{dark})e^{-\eta_o\Delta}$ and $\epsilon_1=(1-p_{dark})e^{-(\eta\mu +\eta_o\Delta)}$, where we have denoted $\mu=|\alpha_1|^2$.

Eve instead performs an optimal quantum detection. For the single observation, this leads to the optimal error probability $\epsilon^*$, which can be calculated as \cite[Lemma 3.1]{Hayashi2006}\cite{Audenaert2007}\cite{Audenaert2008},
\begin{align}
\epsilon^* &=\min_{0 \leq  \Pi \leq \mathbf{1}} [ q\Tr (\mathbf{1} - \Pi)\rho_1 + (1-q)\Tr \Pi \rho_0 )] \\
&= \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2}\norm{q\rho_1 - (1-q) \rho_0}_1,
\end{align} \label{eq:minPe}
where $\norm{}_1$ stands for trace norm. In the binary source scenario, this bound is achieved by the Holevo-Helstrom projector
\cite{Helstrom1976}\cite{Holevo1978}, for which several practical implemetations have been proposed such as the Kennedy receiver \cite{Kennedy1973}, the Dolinar receiver \cite{Dolinar1973} or the Sasaki-Hirota receiver \cite{Takeoka2008}\cite{Tsujino2011}. The optimal error probability of Eve resulting from (5), becomes
\begin{align}
\epsilon^*(\gamma)=(1-\sqrt{1-4q(1-q)e^{-\eta\gamma \mu}})/2.
\end{align}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{imagesDraft/Channels}
\caption{Probabilistic detection models assumed for Bob and Eve to obtain $Y$ and $Z$, respectively.}
\label{fig:Degradation}
\end{figure}

The private capacity for our wiretap channel model coincides with the classical secrecy capacity and is defined as
\begingroup
\small
\begin{align}
C_P(\gamma)&= \max_q \{ I(X;Y) - I(X;Z | \gamma ) \},
\label{eq:PrivateRate}
\end{align}
\endgroup
where $I(X,Y)$ is the Shannon mutual information of Alice using a state-of-the-art photon counting detector and $I(X;Z | \gamma )$ is the maximum Shannon mutual information that Eve can physically detect. For our setting as presented in Section IV, a uniform input probability (i.e. $q=0.5$) is very close to optimum (see Appendix \ref{sec:App0}), and we have
\begingroup
\small
\begin{align}
C_P(\gamma)&= \left[h(\epsilon^*(\gamma)) + h\left(\frac{\epsilon_0+\epsilon_1}{2}\right) - \frac{h(\epsilon_1)+h(\epsilon_0)}{2} - 1\right]_+,
\end{align}
\endgroup

where $[]_+$ means the positive part and we have used the notation $h()$ as the binary Shannon entropy. If we now restrict Eve only by the laws of quantum electrodynamics, we obtain the Devetak-Winters rate \cite{DW2005} for our protocol

\begin{align}
R_{DW} (\gamma)
& = I(X,Y)  - \mathcal{\chi}(X;E|\gamma),
\end{align}
where $I(X;Y)$ is the Shannon mutual information of Alice's choice for input probability and measured by a
state-of-the-art photon counting detector. The quantity $\mathcal{\chi}(X;E|\gamma)$ is the Holevo bound for the eavesdropper. Denoting $\epsilon(\gamma)=\bra{0}\ket{\sqrt{\eta\gamma}\alpha_1}$, for uniform priors (i.e. $q=0.5$) it is easy to show

\begingroup
\small
\begin{align}
R_{DW} (\gamma)
&= \left[h\left(\frac{\epsilon_0+\epsilon_1}{2}\right) - \frac{h(\epsilon_1)+h(\epsilon_0)}{2} - h\left(\frac{1+\epsilon(\gamma)}{2}\right) \right]_+,
\label{eq:DWPrivateRate}
\end{align}
\endgroup

The numerical calculation is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Copt}. We observe that the private rate in \eqref{eq:PrivateRate} is as high as 0.68 for $\gamma = 0.1$ (with little sensitivity to noise, see Appendix  \ref{sec:App1}). And even for adverse channel conditions ($\gamma$ close to 1) there is a positive secrecy rate for reasonable noise (e.g.up to $\gamma = 0.6$ for $\Delta = 10^{-4}$), however we will show below that in practice is best to aim for $\gamma < 0.1$. For comparison, we have also plotted \eqref{eq:DWPrivateRate} for $\gamma=0.1$. We observe a substantial decrease, which is also affected by noise, however, we still get significant positive rates. In the following, we assume the realistic setting of Eve using Helstrom detection.

\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.2]{imagesDraft/FinalFigure_1}
\protect\caption{Private capacity of OOK for $\gamma=0.1$ and $\gamma=0.6$ ($p_{dark} \approx 0$, $\eta_o=1$  $\Delta=10^{-4}.$) For comparison, also the numerical values of $R_{DW}$ for $\gamma=0.1$. }
\label{fig:Copt}
\end{figure}

\section{The Micius satellite: a concrete example of an orbit-earth optical link}

As a realistic physical scenario, we use as a reference the recent experiment of QKD with the Chinese LEO satellite Micius \cite{Micius2017}\cite{Micius2020}. The geometry is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:Geometry}. The satellite has an orbit of about 500 km above the earth surface and exchanges keys over distances up to 1200 km if the satellite is close to the horizon. The transmitter is equipped with 300 mm Cassegrain telescope featuring a far field divergence $\theta_{div}$ of 10 $\mu$rad (full angle at $ 1/e^2$). The receiver at groundstation has a telescope with a diameter $D_R$ of 1m.

\begin{figure}[tbh]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.4]{imagesDraft/Geometry}
\protect\caption{Geometry for the secure and reliable communication of our wiretap protocol showing the exclusion radius $r_E$.}
\label{fig:Geometry}
\end{figure}

We can approximate the fraction of the light collected by Bob, the free space loss $\eta^B_{f}$, as the ratio of the telescope area and the footprint area
\begin{equation}
\eta^B_{f}=\frac{A_{R}}{A_{F}}=\dfrac{\pi (D_R/2)^2}{\pi (D_F/2)^2}=\frac{D_R^2}{\theta_{div}^2d^2_B},
\label{eq:BobBudget}
\end{equation}
with $$D_F \approx \theta_{div}  d$$
where  $d_B$ is the distance between transmitter and receiver.

The number of photons detected by Bob is given by
$\eta \mu =\eta^B_{f}\eta_{b} \mu,$ where  $\eta_{b}$ is the total additional loss of Bob depending on the experimental situation. In the Micius experiment those are atmospheric turbulence 3-8 dB ($\eta_{atm}$), pointing errors ($\eta_p$) $<$ 3 dB, overall optical loss ($\eta_o$) from telescope input lens to detector 7.4 dB detector, detector efficiency $\eta_{det}$  50 \% (3 dB) (see Appendix \ref{sec:App4}). In the following we calculate with a loss $\eta_b$ of 20 dB (1\%).

For Eve we calculate $\eta^E_{f}$ as in (\ref{eq:BobBudget}) but we add a factor taking into account the light intensity outside the exclusion angle supposing a Gaussian angular distribution of the beam as

\begin{equation}
\eta^E_f=\frac{(D^E_R)^2}{\theta_{div}^2d_E^2} e^{-2(\frac{2\theta_E}{\theta_{div}})^2}.
\end{equation}

Then, the number of photons detected by Eve becomes simply $\eta^E_f \mu=\gamma \eta \mu$, as we assume no additional loss for Eve. Hence, for fixed antenna sizes we can easily calculate $\gamma$ as

\begingroup
\small
\begin{align}
\gamma(d_B, d_E,\eta_b, \theta_E, \theta_{div})
&=\dfrac{1}{\eta_b}\Big( \frac{d_B}{d_E} \Big)^2\Big( \frac{D^E_R}{D^B_R} \Big)^2 e^{-2(\frac{2\theta_E}{\theta_{div}})^2}.
\label{eq:physgamma1}
\end{align}
\endgroup

For $d_B=d_E= 1200~km$ and $\theta_E=r_E/d$, for the Micius system parameters and assuming a very large eavesdropper's receiving antenna $D^E_R$ of 2 m and a small exclusion radius  $r_E=12.5$m we obtain:
$$\gamma = 0.07<0.1$$
For the reminder, we fix the exclusion radius such that $\gamma <0.1$. Indeed, this value seems to be a good choice as it leads to high secret capacities $>$ 0.6 (see Fig. \ref{fig:Copt}), little sensitivity to noise and signal fluctuations for reasonable exclusion radii as discussed in Appendix \ref{sec:App1}. This sensitivity is driven by the distinguishability of the coherent states at Eve's Holevo-Helstrom detector as shown in Appendix \ref{sec:App5}, the lower the $\gamma$ the less sensitivity of the distinguishability to signal dynamics.

\section{Private rates for different practical settings and comparison with QKD}

\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.8}
\begin{table*}[ht]
\centering
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Configuration } & \multirow{2}{*}{Distance [km]} & \multirow{2}{*}{Channel loss ($\eta^B_f$)} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{QKD (night) $\Delta = 10^{-7}$} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Wiretap channel (day) $\Delta = 10^{-4}$} \\ \cline{4-8}
 &  &  & Micius & PLOB ($\eta_b = 1$) & exlusion radius $r_E$ [m] & gamma &  private rate \\
\hline
LEO & 500 - 1200 & 22dB & $<$ 10kHz & 10MHz & 12.5 & 0.1 & 700MHz \\
\hline
MEO & 10000 & 40dB & - & 100kHz & 100 & 0.1 & 700MHz \\
\hline
GEO & 36000 & 52dB  & - & 6kHz & 340 & 0.1 & 700MHz \\
\hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Comparison of the achievable secret key rates for QKD and the private rates for the wiretap channel presented in this work. The values are extrapolated from experimental data from the Micius satellite [4] for  $\eta^B_f=22dB$ (@1200 km) and $\eta_b = 20dB$ (except for the theoretical PLOB bound with $\eta_b=1$). The exclusion radii $r_E$ for $\gamma=0.1$ are calculated based on the Micius beam parameters. Note that for Micius and PLOB we consider nighttime operation, in contrast to the case of the wiretap channel where daytime operation is possible.}
\end{table*}

We can now calculate the private capacity for different geometrical configuration, supposing that Alice and Bob have a satellite and a ground station equivalent to the Micius experiment. We consider OOK with a clock rate of 1GHz. With a time window of 1 ns, state of the art single photon detectors feature a $p_{dark} < 10^{-7}$, so detector noise has no significant effect on the secret capacity.  Table 1 in \cite{Er-lon2005} indicates the expected number of noise photons for different collection angles, filter bandwidths and temporal windows. Based on that an average number $\Delta$ of $10^{-4}$ and $10^{-7}$ is an achievable value for clear daytime sky, and a full moon clear night, respectively. During a cloudy day, one could expect a $\Delta$ of $10^{-2}$, and still positive private rates (this is under the assumption that transmission of the channel is affected in the same way for Bob and Eve). See Figure \ref{fig:PvsG} for the sensitivity to noise.

Given the clock rate and the maximum private capacity from Fig. \ref{fig:Copt}, we obtain a private rate of $680Mb/s$ for a $\gamma=0.1$. This value is the same for any channel efficiency $\eta$ as long as the received power $\eta\mu $ is optimized. We can compare these rates with the key rates obtained by QKD in the Micius experiment and a potential perfect quantum communication scheme. Indeed, Pirandola et. al. showed recently \cite{PLOB2017} that there is an upper bound of the achievable secret key rate of a QKD protocol for a given channel transmission $\eta$
\begin{align}
R_{QKD,\infty}(\eta)= -\log_2(1 - \eta).
\end{align}

Table I presents all these rates for LEO, MEO and GEO satellites. As expected, the private capacity of a wiretap channel outperforms QKD dramatically in terms of rate and most importantly in terms of resistance against noise.

Certainly, if the eavesdropper is restricted also the performance of QKD can be improved substantially. As a comparison, we estimate the theoretically achievable secret key rate for QKD following Appendix B in \cite{Shapiro2019}, choosing the parameters such that they are equivalent to our assumptions, notably $\Delta=10^{-4}$ and $\gamma=0.1$. We obtain a similar rate of 360 Mbits/s. However, keyless private communication is arguably easier to implement in practice, in particular it doesn't need two way communication for reconciliation.

There is also a scheme called Quantum Secure Direct Communication \cite{Qi2019}, which combines quantum communication and the possibility to detect the presence of an eavesdropper with encoding like for the wiretap channel. However, since this scheme is impractical, we don't consider it in this comparison.

Finally, some practical remarks. The necessary lasers power in order to reach the optimal signal strength of about 4 photons in average is about 15 mW and 15$\mu$W for the GEO and the LEO setting, respectively, and therefore it is no limitation. However, due to the high signal strength, a GHz repetition rate implies high detection rates at Bob's, which are still a challenge for single photon detectors \cite{matthieu20}.

\section{Discussion and Conclusions}

We have shown the feasibility, practicality and performance of unconditionally secure links for space and show the required exclusion radius. A protection area is needed for any kind of secure communication, including QKD. In this paper, we discussed a downlink, however, similarly, we could also consider an uplink and estimate the channel degradation $\gamma$ for reasonable assumptions on Eve's satellites.

Our protocol is certainly susceptible of jamming attacks, but so are QKD protocols. However, while our protocol cannot protect the communication from jamming and active attacks, it can be used in coordination with security mechanisms in communication layers above the physical layer to provide the satellite system availability, integrity and confidentiality.

Given these boundary conditions, we have demonstrated that physical layer encryption can provide information theoretically secure communication also in the presence of Eve only limited by the laws of quantum physics. As for the wiretap codes, explicit constructions are available that can provide the strong security. Well known constructions are based either on coset codes with random codeword choice within a coset \cite{Thangaraj2007}\cite{Klinc2011} or concatenation of encryption functions (e.g. hashing) with conventional capacity-achieving codes \cite{Tyagi2015}\cite{Hayashi2020} (e.g. low-density parity code (LDPC), polar code or Reed Muller codes).

The achievable private rates are considerably higher than the QKD rates for an unrestricted Eve. Moreover, direct private communication is also possible close to illuminated cities and even during daytime in contrast to QKD.
Moreover, given the low rates, the secret keys generated by QKD will in practice not be used in combination with the one-time-pad but with symmetric encryption systems like Advanced Encryption Standard (AES). This means that the legitimate users have to choose between trusting physical security including exclusion areas around Alice and Bob (which is arguably needed for QKD as well) or the computational security of encryption algorithms.

Overall, physical layer encryption seems to be a reasonable choice for satellite communication.

\begin{acknowledgments}
We would like to acknowledge Antonio Ac\'in, Andreas Winter, Masahito Hayashi, Christoph Wildfeuer and Mikael Afzelius for useful discussions. D.R. acknowledges the support of European Union’s Horizon 2020 program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie project QCALL (No. GA 675662).
\end{acknowledgments}


\section{Introduction\label{sec:intro}}

The random packing of elongated particles onto a plane is a challenging problem that has been the ongoing focus of many researchers. The particle shape may affect the packing characteristics (e.g., packing density and coordination numbers)~\cite{Zou1996,Guises2009,Kyrylyuk2011}, the aggregation~\cite{Kwan2001}, and the gravity- and vibration-induced segregation~\cite{Abreu2003}. A lot of interest in such systems continues to be stimulated by practical problems related to the  preparation of advanced materials~\cite{Bokobza2019,Yang2019} and composite films~\cite{Hirotani2019,Tiginyanu2019}, filled with elongated nanoparticles, e.g., carbon nanotubes~\cite{Pampaloni2019} and silicate platelets~\cite{Lebovka2019Springer}.

For the simulation of random packings, random sequential adsorption (RSA) models~\cite{Evans1993,Adamczyk2012} are frequently used. In such models, the particles are deposited randomly and sequentially onto a two-dimensional (2D) substrate without overlapping. At  the so-called ``jamming limit'', where $\varphi_\text{j}$ is the saturated coverage concentration,   no more particles can be adsorbed and the deposition process terminates. The problems related to the kinetics of 2D RSA, the jamming limit, and the asymptotic behavior of RSA deposition for elongated particles (ellipses, rectangles, discorectangles, and needles) were discussed in detail~\cite{Talbot1989,Tarjus1991,Viot1992,Viot1992a,Ricci1992,Talbot2000}.  The  saturated 2D RSA packings for different particle shapes, including disks~\cite{Feder1980}, ellipses~\cite{Talbot1989,Sherwood1990}, squares~\cite{Viot1990}, rectangles~\cite{Vigil1989,Vigil1990}, discorectangles~\cite{Haiduk2018,Lebovka2020b},  polygons~\cite{Ciesla2014}, sphere dimers, sphere polymers, $k$-mers and extended objects~\cite{Perino2017,Budinski-Petkovic2016,Lebovka2020a}, and other shapes~\cite{Ciesla2013,Ciesla2013a,Ciesla2015} have been studied in detail. Particularly, for very elongated unoriented particles the saturation coverage gone to zero when the aspect ratio becomes infinite~\cite{Viot1992,Viot1992a}. Moreover, the non-monotonic dependencies of the values of $\varphi_\text{j}$ versus the aspect ratio,  $\varepsilon$, have been observed. Similar dependencies have also been observed for saturated RSA packings of elongated particles in one-dimensional (1D)~\cite{Baule2017,Ciesla2020,Lebovka2020} and three-dimensional (3D)~\cite{Donev2004,Chaikin2006,Gan2020a} systems. The appearance of maximums of the jamming concentration can be explained by a competition between the effects of orientational degrees of freedom and excluded volume effects~\cite{Donev2004}.

The formation of long-range connectivity is the primary issue to be solved for better understanding of the percolation phenomena of core--shell anisotropic particles in random packings. Core--shell composite particles consist of an inner layer of one material (the core) and an outer layer of another material (the shell). Core--shell particles have already demonstrated promising applications in electrochemical, optical, wearable and gas adsorptive sensors~\cite{Kalambate2019}, electrode materials~\cite{Ho2019},  polymeric composites~\cite{Ryu2018} and drug delivery applications~\cite{Schmitt2020}. The practical significance of the problem is also related to a need to obtain a description of the behavior of the electrical conductivity of composites filled with elongated core--shell particles, e.g., carbon nanotubes and fibers, metallic nanorods and nanocables, and other core--shell particulates~\cite{Balberg1987,Berhan2007,White2010,Nan2010,Panda2014,Tomylko2015,Ryu2018,Chen2018,Xu2020,Islam2020,Balberg2020}. In general, the inner material can be covered partially or fully by a single or multiple outer layers. By regulation of the shell properties, materials with enhanced optical, electrical, or magnetic characteristics, and improved thermal stability or dispersibility can be obtained. For particles with core--shell structures, their resulting electrical conductivity can reflect the effects of particle ordering, packing, connectivity rules and the intrinsic properties of the cores, the matrix, and the interface between the particles and the matrix (shells).

In this paper, we shall concentrate on the percolation effects in 2D RSA packings of discorectangles. A hard core---soft shell structure of particles was assumed and anisotropic packing with preferential orientation of the particles along a given direction were considered. The effects of the particle aspect ratios, orientation ordering, and packing fraction on the electrical conductivity of the packings together with the critical thickness of the shells required for a spanning path through the system were evaluated. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Sec.~\ref{sec:methods}, the technical details of the simulations are described and all necessary quantities are defined. In order to provide a better understanding in respect of the precision of the calculations a range of some test results are also given. Section~\ref{sec:results} presents our principal findings and discussions. Finally, Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} summarizes our findings.

\section{Computational model\label{sec:methods}}
A discorectangle is a rectangle with semicircles at a pair of opposite sides. The discorectangles were randomly and sequentially deposited until they reached the saturated coverage concentration $\varphi_\text{j}$. An optimized RSA algorithm, based on the tracking of local regions, was used~\cite{Haiduk2018,Lebovka2020b}. The aspect ratio (length-to-width ratio) was defined as $\varepsilon=l/d$, where $l$ is the length of the particle and $d$ is its width. Discorectangles with $\varepsilon \in [1;100]$ were considered.

The degree of orientation was characterized by the order parameter defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:S}
  S = \left\langle \cos 2\theta  \right\rangle,
\end{equation}
where $\langle\cdot\rangle$ denotes the average, $\theta$ is the angle between the long axis of the particle and the direction of the preferred orientation of the particles ($x$ direction).

For generation of the aligned packings, the orientations of the deposited particles were  selected to be uniformly distributed within some interval such that $-\theta_\text{m} \leqslant \theta \leqslant \theta_\text{m}$, where $\theta_\text{m} \leqslant \pi/2$~\cite{Balberg1983}. For the selected model of deposition~\cite{Balberg1983} the order parameter was calculated as~\cite{Lebovka2019}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:S0}
S = \frac{\sin 2\theta_\text{m}}{2\theta_\text{m}}.
\end{equation}

Figure~\ref{fig:f01} shows examples of the packing patterns in the jamming state for discorectangles with aspect ratios $\varepsilon = 2$, (a); and  $\varepsilon = 5$, (b). For random orientation of particles  ($\theta_\text{m} = \pi/2$) we have $S=0$ and for complete alignment of particles along the horizontal direction $x$ ($\theta_\text{m} = 0$) we have $S=1$. For intermediate values $0<S<1$ during the deposition, some particle orientations may be rejected and the real order parameter in the deposit may differ from the preassigned value~\cite{Lebovka2011,Lebovka2020b}.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{f01}
\caption{Examples of RSA packings in the jamming state for discorectangles with aspect ratios $\varepsilon = 2$ (a); and $\varepsilon = 5$ (b); and at different values of the order parameters:  $S=0$ (random orientation), $S=0.5$ (partial orientation) and $S=1$ (complete alignment along the horizontal direction $x$).\label{fig:f01}}
\end{figure*}

The dimensions of the system under consideration were $L$ along both the horizontal ($x$) and the vertical ($y$) axes, and periodic boundary conditions were applied in both directions. The time was measured using dimensionless time units, $t=n/L^2$, where $n$ is the number of deposition attempts. Figure~\ref{fig:f02} shows examples of the coverage concentration $\varphi$ versus the deposition time, $t$ , for the RSA packing of random ($S=0$)  and perfectly aligned ($S=1$) discorectangles with aspect ratio $\varepsilon=4$ at different values of $L/l$. Similar dependencies were observed for other values of $S$ and $\varepsilon$. The scaling tests with $L/l = 16, 32, 64$, and $128$ evidenced the good convergence of the data at $L/l \geqslant 32$. In the present work, the majority of calculations were performed using $L = 32l$ and the jamming coverage was assumed to be reached after a deposition time of $t=L^2 \times 10^{10}$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f02}\\
	\caption{Coverage concentration $\varphi$ versus the deposition time, $t$, for the RSA packing of random ($S=0$)  and perfectly aligned ($S=1$) discorectangles with aspect ratio $\varepsilon=4$ at different values of $L/l$. Here, $\varphi_\text{j}$ is the jamming coverage. Inset shows an  enlarged portion of the $\varphi (t)$ plot near the saturation concentration.
 \label{fig:f02} }
\end{figure}

The analysis of the connectivity was performed assuming a core--shell structure of the particles, with particle having an outer shell of thickness $\delta d$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f03}a). Any two particles were assumed to be connected when the minimal distance between their hard cores did not exceed the value of $\delta d$. The connectivity analysis was carried out using a list of near-neighbor particles~\cite{Marck1997}. The minimum (critical) value of the relative outer shell thickness, $\delta_\text{c}$, (hereinafter, the shell thickness) required for the formation of spanning clusters in the $x$ or $y$ direction, was evaluated using the Hoshen---Kopelman algorithm~\cite{Hoshen1976}.
\begin{figure*}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{f03}
	\caption{Approaches to description of the connectivity analysis (a) and calculation of electrical conductivity (b) of the RSA packing of discorectangles on a 2D substrate. A core--shell structure of the particles was assumed. Intersections of the particle cores were forbidden. For the connectivity analysis, each particle was assumed to be covered by a soft (penetrable) shell of thickness $\delta d$. To calculate the electrical conductivity, $\sigma$, a discretization approach with a supporting mesh was used. The mesh cells with centers located at the cores, shells, or pores parts were assumed to have electrical conductivity of $\sigma_\text{c}$, $\sigma_\text{s}$ and $\sigma_\text{m}$, respectively.  (c) For larger values of the aspect ratio (slender-rod limit),  discorectangles were treated as zero-width rods with the electrical conductivity $\sigma_\text{c}$.
(d) Example of a transformation of slender rods into a RRN. \label{fig:f03}}
\end{figure*}

To calculate the electrical conductivity, $\sigma$, two approaches was used. Within the first one (m-model), the 2D plane was covered by a supporting square mesh of size $m \times m$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f03}b). The mesh cells with centers located at the core, shell, or pore parts were assumed to have electrical conductivities of $\sigma_\text{c}$, $\sigma_\text{s}$ and $\sigma_\text{m}$, respectively. Then each cell was associated with a set of four resistors and the system was transformed into a random resistor network (RRN) ) (for more details see Appendix~\ref{sec:appendixmmodel}). Note that calculations at large values of $m$ provided better accuracy, but required significantly more computing resources. Therefore, the effects of the values $m$ ($m = 1024, 2048, 4096$) on the calculated values of $\sigma$ were also checked in some calculations. This approach has been used for the values of the aspect ratios up to~20. To calculate the electrical conductivity of the RRN the Frank---Lobb algorithm
based on the Y-$\triangle$ transformation was applied~\cite{Frank1988}. More detailed information on the calculation of the electrical conductivity can be found elsewhere~\cite{Tarasevich2018,Tarasevich2018a}.

For larger values of the aspect ratio (slender-rod limit), other approach (t-model) was used. The electrical conductivity of the substrate was ignored ($\sigma_\text{m}=0$). Within this approach, discorectangles were treated as zero-width rods with the electrical conductivity  $\sigma_\text{c}$. The electrical conductance between any two points (say, $i$ and $j$) belonging to the same rod is inverse proportional to the distance $l_{i,j}$between these point (see, e.g., \cite{Tarasevich2019JAPa,Tarasevich2019JAPb}). The electrical conductivity between any two rods with overlapping shells is proportional of  the width of the conduction channel (maximal width of the overlapping) and inverse proportional to its length (the effective distance between their cores) $G_{ij}^\text{s} = \sigma_\text{s} d_\text{i}/ l_\text{e}$. The effective distance may be estimated as
$$
l_\text{e} = \frac{2\delta d d_\text{i} - A}{d_\text{i}},
$$
where $A$ is the area of the overlapping shells and $d_\text{i}$ is the distance between the two intersection points of the outer perimeters of these shells (see Fig.~\ref{fig:f03}c,  Fig.~\ref{fig:f03}d, and Appendix~\ref{sec:appendix} for details of overlapping calculations). In the particular case of parallel or perpendicular rectangles with the core--shell structure, this approach provides exact values of the electrical conductance. In the case of arbitrary oriented discorectangles with the core--shell structure, this approach provides approximate values of the electrical conductance.

Then, Kirchhoff's current law was applied to each junction, and Ohm's law used for each circuit between two junctions. The resulting set of equations was solved to find the total conductance of the RRN. More detailed information on the calculation of the electrical conductivity can be found elsewhere~\cite{Tarasevich2019JAPa,Tarasevich2019JAPb}.

Large contrasts in electrical conductivities were assumed, $\sigma_\text{c} \gg\sigma_\text{s} \gg \sigma_\text{m}$. We let $\sigma_\text{c}=10^{12}, \sigma_\text{s}=10^6$ and $\sigma_\text{m}=1$ in arbitrary units. In this case, resistance of shells give the main contribution in the electrical resistance of the system under consideration, while resistance of cores has negligible contribution. For each given value of $\varepsilon$ and $S$, the computer experiments were repeated using from 10 to 1000 independent runs. The error bars in the figures correspond to the standard deviations of the means. When not shown explicitly, they are of the order of the marker size.

\section{Results and Discussion\label{sec:results}}

\subsection{Connectivity}
For a discorectangle, the critical shell thicknesses $\delta_{c,x}$ and $\delta_{c,y}$ correspond to the formation of percolation clusters in the $x$ and $y$ direction, respectively. For isotropic system with $S=0$, the values of $\delta_{c,x}$ and $\delta_{c,y}$ coincide, i.e., $\delta_{c,x}=\delta_{c,y}$. For anisotropic systems with $S\neq 0$, these values may be different. At a fixed value of shell thicknesses, $\delta$, the critical coverages $\varphi_{c,x}$ and $\varphi_{c,y}$, required for the formation of percolation clusters in the $x$ and $y$ directions, respectively, can be also defined.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f06}
	\caption{Scaling dependencies of the critical shell thickness $\delta_\text{c}$ at different values of particle coverage, $\varphi_{c}$, (a) and of the critical particle coverage $\varphi_\text{c}$ at different fixed values of shell thickness, $\delta$ (b). The data are presented for an aspect ratio of $\varepsilon=4$ for completely disordered ($S=0$, dashed lines) and  completely aligned ($S=1$, solid lines) packings. For $S=0$ the data along the $x$ and $y$ directions almost coincide. Here, $L(=16l, 32l, 64l, 128l)$ is the size of the system. $\nu = 4/3$ is the 2D correlation length percolation exponent~\cite{Stauffer1992}. \label{fig:f06}}
\end{figure}

Figure~\ref{fig:f06}a shows examples of the critical shell thickness $\delta_\text{c}$ versus the inverse systems size $1/L$ at different values of $\varphi$. Here, $L(=16l,32l,64l, 128l)$ is the size of the system. The data are presented for aspect ratio of $\varepsilon=4$ for completely disordered ($S=0$, dashed lines) and  completely aligned ($S=1$, solid lines) packings. Increase in $\varphi$ resulted in a decrease of $\delta_\text{c}$ and the minimum values of $\delta_\text{c}$ were observed at the jamming coverage ($\varphi=\varphi_\text{j}\approx 0.557$ for $\varepsilon=4$). For $S=0$, the data along the $x$ and $y$ directions almost coincide. However, for finite-sized aligned systems ($S\neq 0$), the value of $\delta_{c,y}$ always exceeded the value of $\delta_{c,x}$, and both these values exceeded the value $\delta_\text{c}$ for isotropic systems. Figure~\ref{fig:f06}b shows similar examples of the critical coverage $\varphi_\text{c}$ versus the value of $L^{-1/\nu}$ at different fixed values of shell thickness, $\delta$.  Here, $\nu=4/3$ is the 2D correlation length percolation exponent~\cite{Stauffer1992}. The data on the critical coverage $\varphi_\text{c}$ also demonstrated the presence of percolation anisotropy for the finite-sized aligned systems ($S\neq 0$). Similar percolation anisotropy was observed in finite-sized discrete systems with aligned rods ($k$-mers) and the finite size effects were also more pronounced for systems with aligned rods~\cite{Tarasevich2012,Tarasevich2016,Tarasevich2018}.
Thus, it can be concluded that anisotropies observed in the behavior of the critical shell thickness, $\delta_\text{c}$, and the critical coverage $\varphi_\text{c}$ are finite size scaling effects and that they disappear in the limit of $L\rightarrow\infty$. Moreover, the scaling behaviors of the value $\delta_\text{c}$ for completely disordered ($S=0$) and of the average value of $\delta_\text{c}=(\delta_{c,x}$+$\delta_{c,y})/2$ for aligned ($S\neq 0$) packings were fairly  insignificant for $L/l\geqslant 32$. Therefore, in the present work, the averaged values of $\delta_\text{c}$ and $\varphi_\text{c}$ in both directions were always used and all connectivity analysis tests were performed using $L/l = 32$.

Figure~\ref{fig:f07} and Fig.~\ref{fig:f08} demonstrate examples of the critical shell thickness $\delta_\text{c}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f07}), and the critical coverage $\varphi_\text{c}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f08}), versus the aspect ratio, $\varepsilon$, for completely disordered, $S=0$, (a); and  completely aligned, $S=1$, (b) packings. For completely disordered systems ($S=0$)  maximums on the $\delta_\text{c}(\varepsilon)$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f07}a) and $\varphi_\text{c}(\varepsilon)$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f08}a) curves, at some values of $\varepsilon_\text{max}$, were observed. The positions of these maximums were controlled by the values of $\varphi$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f07}a) and $\delta$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f08}a).
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f07}
\caption{Critical shell thickness $\delta_\text{c}$ versus the aspect ratio $\varepsilon$ at different coverages, $\varphi$ for completely disordered, $S=0$, (a) and  completely aligned, $S=1$, (b) packings. \label{fig:f07}}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f08}\\
	\caption{Critical coverage  $\varphi_\text{c}$ versus the aspect ratio $\varepsilon$ at different shell thickness, $\delta$, for completely disordered, $S=0$, (a) and  completely aligned, $S=1$, (b) packings.  \label{fig:f08}}
\end{figure}

The observed maximums in the percolation characteristics $\delta_\text{c}$ and $\varphi_\text{c}$ may reflect the internal structure of the RSA packings of elongated particles. In particular,   maximums in the jamming coverage $\varphi_\text{j}$ versus the $\varepsilon$ dependencies were also observed for disordered packings and could be explained by the competition between the effects of orientational degrees of freedoms and excluded volume effects. The jamming limit decreased with $\varepsilon$~\cite{Lebovka2020b}, and for elongated particles in the vicinity of percolation packings, terminations of the curves $\delta_\text{c}(\varepsilon)$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f07}a) and $\varphi_\text{c} (\varepsilon)$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f08}a) at some critical values of $\varepsilon$ were observed.

These maximums became less pronounced for partially aligned systems, and they completely disappeared for completely aligned, $S=1$, packings (Fig.~\ref{fig:f07}b and Fig.~\ref{fig:f08}b). For the case of $S=1$, the values of $\delta_\text{c}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f07}b) and $\varphi_\text{c}$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f08}b) grew with increasing values of $\varepsilon$, and for relatively small shell thickness, $\delta$, the termination of $\varphi_\text{c} (\varepsilon)$  was observed when the values of $\varphi_\text{c}$ exceed the jamming coverage, $\varphi_\text{j}$.

\subsection{Intrinsic conductivity}
The concept of intrinsic conductivity is useful for description of the behavior of the electrical conductivity in the limiting case of an infinitely diluted system. For randomly aligned and arbitrarily shaped particles with electrical conductivity $\sigma_p$ suspended in a continuous medium with electrical conductivity $\sigma_\text{m}$, the generalized Maxwell model gives the following virial expansion~\cite{Douglas1995,Garboczi1996}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Garboczi1996}
\frac{\sigma}{\sigma_\text{m}} =1+[\sigma] \varphi+ \mathrm{O}(\varphi^2),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ic}
[\sigma] = \left.\frac{\mathrm{d}\ln\left(\sigma/\sigma_\text{m}\right)}{\mathrm{d}\varphi}\right|_{\varphi \to 0},
\end{equation}
is called the intrinsic conductivity, and $\varphi$ is the coverage concentration.

The value of the intrinsic conductivity $[\sigma]$ can depend upon the electrical conductivity contrast $\Delta=\sigma_p/\sigma_\text{m}$, the particle's aspect ratio, $\varepsilon$, the order parameter, $S$, and a spatial dimension.

Figure~\ref{fig:f04}a demonstrates examples of intrinsic conductivities $[\sigma]$ versus the order parameter, $S$. The data are presented in the $x$ and $y$ directions for discorectangles with different aspect ratios $\varepsilon$. These dependencies were obtained using a mesh parameter of $m=4096$ over 1000 independent runs. The observed $[\sigma]$ versus $S$ relationships were almost  linear:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:icS}
[\sigma]=[\sigma]_0 (1 \pm\kappa S),
\end{equation}
where $[\sigma]_0$ is the intrinsic conductivity for the isotropic system with $S=0$,  $\kappa$ is the anisotropy coefficient, and the signs $+$ or $-$ correspond to the $x$ or $y$ directions, respectively.

Therefore, the intrinsic conductivity $[\sigma]_x$ along alignment direction $x$ exceeded  value  $[\sigma]_y$ in the perpendicular direction hence symmetric behavior with the same anisotropy coefficients $\kappa$ was observed.

Figure~\ref{fig:f04}b presents values of $[\sigma]_0$ and $\kappa$ versus the aspect ratio $\varepsilon$. The intrinsic conductivity for the isotropic system  $[\sigma]_0$ increased with $\varepsilon$. Note, that similar behavior has been predicted theoretically for randomly aligned ellipses ($S=0$)~\cite{Douglas1995,Garboczi1996}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Sangani1990sigma}
[\sigma]=\frac{(\Delta^2-1)(1+\varepsilon)^2}{2(1+\varepsilon\Delta)(\Delta+\varepsilon)}.
\end{equation}
For  $\Delta \gg 1$, this equation gives (see dashed line in Fig.~\ref{fig:f04}b)
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Elliptical1}
[\sigma] = 1 + \frac{1}{2} \left( \varepsilon + \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \right).
\end{equation}
The anisotropy coefficient $\kappa$ also increased with $\varepsilon$. It presumably  tend to the unit in the limit $\varepsilon\gg 1$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f04}\\
	\caption{Examples of intrinsic conductivities $[\sigma]$ versus the order parameter, $S$. The data are presented along the $x$ and $y$ directions for discorectangles with aspect ratios $\varepsilon=2,4,10$ (a). Dependencies of the parameters $[\sigma]_0$, $\kappa$ (See Eq.~\ref{eq:icS}) versus $\varepsilon$ (b).\label{fig:f04}}.
\end{figure}

Figure~\ref{fig:f05} illustrates the effect of mesh size $m$ on the precision of $[\sigma]$ determination at two values of the aspect ratio $\varepsilon$. The observed $[\sigma]$ versus the inverse mesh size $1/m$ were almost linear: $[\sigma]=[\sigma]_\infty (1 +a/m),$
where $[\sigma]_\infty $ and $a$ are the fitting parameters. The data evidenced that estimation errors of $[\sigma]$  increased with increasing value of $\varepsilon$ reaching about $2\%$ for $\varepsilon=20$ and $m=1024$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f05}\\
	\caption{Normalized intrinsic conductivity $[\sigma]/[\sigma]_\infty$ in the $x$ and $y$ directions versus the inverse mesh size $1/m$ at different aspect ratios $\varepsilon=4,20$, and $S=1$. Here, the value of $[\sigma]_\infty $ corresponds to the intrinsic conductivity in the limit of $m\to\infty$. \label{fig:f05}}
\end{figure}

\subsection{Electrical conductivity\label{subsec:conductivity}}

For each independent run the electrical conductivity $\sigma$ displayed a jump at some percolation concentration $\varphi_\sigma$. Figure~\ref{fig:f09} presents $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\mathrm{d}\varphi=\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$, for RSA packings of disks ($\varepsilon=1$) at the different shell thicknesses, $\delta=0.2$ and $\delta=0.8$.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f09}
\caption{Electrical conductivity,  $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\mathrm{d}\varphi=\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$, for RSA packings of disks ($\varepsilon=1$) at different shell thicknesses $\delta$. Here, the value of $\varphi_\sigma$ was identified from the concentration at the percolation jump for each independent run, with calculations being carried out using a mesh size of $m=1024$. Dashed lines corresponds to the classical exponents $s=t\approx 4/3$~\cite{Stauffer1992}.\label{fig:f09}}
\end{figure}

In order to check for the possible non-universality of the percolation exponents, the critical conductivity indexes $s$ and $t$ were estimated from the scaling relations for the electrical conductivities just below, $\sigma \propto (\mathrm{d}\varphi)^{-s}$, and above, $\sigma \propto (\mathrm{d}\varphi)^{t}$, the percolation threshold~\cite{Stauffer1992}. The classical values for 2D percolation are $s=t\approx 4/3$. Obtained data evidenced the satisfactory correspondence of the percolation exponents to the classical universality. Below the percolation threshold the difference between the curves for $\delta=0.2$ and $\delta=0.8$ evidently reflected the effects of the shell thickness on the value of $\varphi_\sigma$. Above the percolation threshold, such effects were insignificant. Figure~\ref{fig:f10} compares  $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\mathrm{d}\varphi=\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$, dependencies, for RSA packings of discorectangles ($\varepsilon=4$) at a fixed value of $\delta=0.2$ for completely disordered, $S=0$, (a); and  completely aligned, $S=1$, (b) packings. For aligned packings, a significant anisotropy  in the electrical conductivity was observed and the values along the alignment direction, $\sigma_x$, significantly exceeded the values in the perpendicular direction, $\sigma_y$. Importantly, the obtained data for the mesh sizes of $m=1024$ and $m=2048$ were approximately the same within data errors.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f10}\\
	\caption{Electrical conductivity,  $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$, for RSA packings of discorectangles with different values of aspect ratios, $\varepsilon$, for a fixed shell thickness of $\delta=0.2$ for completely disordered, $S=0$, (a) and  completely aligned, $S=1$, (b) packings. Here, the value of $\varphi_\sigma$ was identified from the concentration at the percolation jump for each independent run, with the calculations being performed using a mesh size of $m=1024$. Dashed lines corresponds to the classical exponents $s=t\approx 4/3$~\cite{Stauffer1992}.\label{fig:f10}}
\end{figure}

Figure~\ref{fig:f11} compares the electrical conductivity, $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\mathrm{d}\varphi=\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$ for fairly long discorectangles ($\varepsilon=10$). The data are presented at a fixed value of $\delta=0.3$ for completely aligned ($S=1$) RSA packings at two values of $m$. The observed behavior for $\varepsilon=10$ was similar to that seen with $\varepsilon=4$ (Fig.~\ref{fig:f10}b). Above the percolation threshold ($\varphi>\varphi_\sigma$) the effect of $m$ was insignificant. However, below percolation threshold ($\varphi<\varphi_\sigma$) the electrical conductivities estimated at $m=1024$ were systematically smaller compared to those estimated at $m=2048$. Above the percolation threshold, the electrical conductivities obtained within m-model and t-model demonstrate similar behavior.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f11}\\
	\caption{Electrical conductivity,  $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$. The data are presented for discorectangles with an aspect ratio $\varepsilon=10$ and a shell thickness of $\delta=0.3$, for completely aligned, $S=1$, RSA packings. Here, the value of $\varphi_\sigma$ was identified from the concentration at the  percolation jump for each independent run, with the calculations being performed using mesh sizes of $m=1024$ and $m=2048$. Moreover, above the percolation threshold, the electrical conductivity obtained within t-model is also presented. Dashed lines corresponds to the classical exponents $s=t\approx 4/3$~\cite{Stauffer1992}.\label{fig:f11}}
\end{figure}

Finally, Fig.~\ref{fig:f12} compares the electrical conductivity, $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\mathrm{d}\varphi=\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$ for long discorectangles ($\varepsilon=50,100$). The data are presented at a fixed value of $\delta=0.8$ for completely disordered, $S=0$, and completely aligned ($S=1$) RSA packings. The results have been obtain within t-model.
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
	\centering
	\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{f12}\\
	\caption{Electrical conductivity,  $\sigma$, versus the difference, $\left|\varphi-\varphi_\sigma\right|$. The data are presented for discorectangles with the aspect ratios $\varepsilon=50,100$ and a shell thickness of $\delta=0.8$, for completely disordered, $S=0$, and completely aligned, $S=1$, RSA packings. Here, the value of $\varphi_\sigma$ was identified from the concentration at the  percolation jump for each independent run. Dashed lines corresponds to the exponents $t\approx 2.3$ and $t\approx 4/3$~\cite{Stauffer1992}.\label{fig:f12}}
\end{figure}

For completely disordered systems ($S=0$), obtained data evidenced the correspondence of the percolation exponents to the classical universality, $t\approx 4/3$. However, for completely aligned RSA packings ($S=1$), significant anisotropy in electrical conductivity and deviations from the classical universality were observed. In the direction of alignment, $x$,  the exponents $t\approx 2.3$ were observed for the both $\varepsilon =50$ and $\varepsilon =100$ values. In the perpendicular direction, $y$, the exponents closer to the classical universality value $t\approx 4/3$ were observed. The similar non-universal values of the critical conductivity exponents were observed for systems of penetrable sticks and nanowires~\cite{Keblinski2004,Li2010,Zevzelj2012,Han2018,Kim2019,Ponzoni2019,Fata2020}. Particularly, $t$ transitions from $\approx 1$ to $\approx 2$ was observed in nanowire-to-junction resistance dominated networks~\cite{Fata2020}. The effects of widthless stick alignment on the percolation critical exponents were also observed. In our case, for impenetrable very elongated particles with core--shell structure, the change in the critical exponent may reflect the changes in the morphology of conducting paths in the networks with a change in coverage.

\section{Conclusion\label{sec:conclusion}}

Numerical studies of two-dimensional RSA deposition of aligned discorectangles on a plane were carried out. The resulting partial ordering was characterized by the order parameter $S$, with $S=0$ for random orientation of the particles and $S=1$ for completely aligned particles in the horizontal direction $x$. Analysis of connectivity was performed assuming a core--shell structure of the particles. The values of the aspect ratio, $\varepsilon$, and order parameter, $S$, significantly affected the structures of the packings, the formation of long-range connectivity and of the behavior of the electrical conductivity. The observed effects probably reflect the competition between the particles' orientational degrees of freedom and the excluded volume effects~\cite{Chaikin2006}. For aligned systems, different anisotropies in intrinsic conductivity, long range connectivity, and the behavior of electrical conductivity were observed. For example, a significant anisotropy in electrical conductivity was observed and the values in the alignment direction, $\sigma_x$, were larger than the values in the perpendicular direction, $\sigma_y$.  For aligned finite-size systems, the percolation thresholds in the $x$ and $y$ directions were different.  However, these differences disappeared in the limit of infinitely large systems.

\begin{acknowledgments}
We are thankful to I.V.Vodolazskaya for our stimulating discussions and to A.G.Gorkun for technical assistance.
We acknowledge funding from the National research foundation of Ukraine, Grant No.~2020.02/0138 (M.O.T., N.V.V.), the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Project Nos.~7/9/3-f-4-1230-2020,~0120U100226 and~0120U102372/20-N (N.I.L.), and funding from the Foundation for the Advancement of Theoretical Physics and Mathematics ``BASIS'', Grant No. 20-1-1-8-1. (Y.Y.T. and A.V.E.).
\end{acknowledgments}