Group 1 - The core argument of the article emphasizes the challenges faced by latecomer economies in achieving leapfrog development, highlighting the need for innovative strategies to overcome obstacles such as capability failure and scale failure [2][4][6] - The author identifies three viable "bends" or strategies for latecomer economies to achieve leapfrog development, which include promoting imitation innovation under relaxed intellectual property protection, engaging with global value chains, and focusing on short-cycle high-tech sectors before transitioning to long-cycle industries [4][5][6] - The concept of "crossing over" is defined as the final stage of catching up, allowing latecomer economies to bypass existing intellectual property and enter new technological fields, which can be achieved through both inter-industry and intra-industry transitions [6][7] Group 2 - The article discusses the importance of a comprehensive theory of economic catch-up that integrates the sequence of "late entry → bend strategy → leapfrog development," which is crucial for overcoming the identified failures and barriers [7] - The author presents three paradoxes that underpin the catch-up theory: "different paths lead to the same goal," "bends are faster than straight roads," and "only well-prepared firms can attempt to leap," emphasizing the need for unique strategies to surpass leading economies [8]