Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the report discusses whether the economic performance in the first half of the year will influence the policy intensity in the second half, with a GDP growth of 5.3% exceeding the annual target of 5.0% by 0.3 percentage points [2][7] - The report highlights that the policy response may not solely depend on achieving the annual target but also on marginal changes in economic conditions, suggesting a dynamic observation of trends [4][19] - Historical analysis shows that years with GDP exceeding targets have led to varied interest rate movements in the second half, indicating that internal economic momentum and external disturbances play significant roles in policy decisions [3][5][9] Group 2 - The report identifies three typical scenarios for the second half following a strong first half: 1) Continued strong economic performance leading to policy tightening and rising interest rates; 2) External shocks prompting monetary easing and falling interest rates; 3) Weakening internal momentum resulting in cautious policy adjustments [3][18] - It emphasizes that even with a strong first half, if high-frequency data shows weakening in the latter part of the year, there is a possibility of policy measures being reintroduced to support growth [5][22] - The report notes that the current policy framework is increasingly responsive to marginal changes rather than being strictly anchored to annual targets, reflecting a shift in policy-making dynamics [4][19][20]