The question you're asking is complex and multifaceted, and the answer would depend on a variety of factors. However, I can provide a general perspective on this.

$1.$ Restructuring CI: Counterintelligence $($CI$)$ is a crucial part of any intelligence community $($IC$).$ Restructuring could be beneficial if it's done to streamline operations, improve efficiency, or adapt to new threats or technologies. However, it's important to ensure that any restructuring doesn't disrupt ongoing operations or compromise the effectiveness of CI$.$

$2.$ Integrating more technical solutions: The use of technology in CI and HUMINT $($human intelligence$)$ operations has increased significantly in recent years. Technology can provide new tools for gathering and analyzing intelligence, and can also help to counter threats from adversaries who are using advanced technology. However, it's important to balance the use of technology with the need for human judgment and expertise.

$3.$ Increasing personnel and expanding training: This could be a very effective way to address counterintelligence gaps. More personnel can mean more resources for gathering and analyzing intelligence, and expanded training can ensure that personnel have the skills and knowledge they need to do their jobs effectively. However, it's also important to ensure that the IC has the resources to support additional personnel and training.

In conclusion, it's likely that a combination of all three approaches $$ restructuring CI$,$ integrating more technical solutions, and increasing personnel and expanding training $$ would be the most effective way to address counterintelligence gaps. However, the specific mix would depend on the specific needs and circumstances of the IC$.$