The Worldwide Contradiction of the GAI Regulatory Theory Paradigm and China’s Response: Focus on the Theories of Normative Models and Regulatory Systems

In the period when mankind is entering the intelligent era, Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), as a leapfrog achievement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) development, has become the core technology of intelligent industrial transformation. However, as one of the emerging industries in the international community, GAI’s normative model and management system theory as a “pre-consideration” have defects, resulting in regulatory gaps or weak sectors in its transformation practice, which makes some entities in the GAI industry abuse GAI resources. In order to avoid this problem, all countries have adopted different single planning governance paradigms, but the applicable single planning governance paradigm followed by each country has its own limitations. This paper discusses the network gauge theory system under system optimization. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the essential causes of this worldwide problem, clarify the specific response limitations of countries to follow the applicable single planning governance paradigm theory, and the implementation dilemma under different attempts to explore and update the regulatory system theory. In addition, it tries to explain and complete China’s theoretical arrangement and solution exploration on the dual dimension of regulation and management, explore the theory of network normative mode from the perspective of system optimization, explore the balance setting theory of governance-type supervision from the principle of two-law inverse, solve the two major imprisons of international GAI governance with dynamic integration methods.