user9111: Please list the differences between the game of Chess and the game of Go for engine programming in a similar format as this one:
Go:

Item 1
Item 2
...

Chess:

Item 1
Item 2
...


user8944: Go:

3 type of piece on a square (black, white, none)
huge board (19x19)
pieces appearing on board
close to 3^400 possible positions

Chess

13 type of pieces on a square (6 black, 6 white, none)
smaller board (8x8)
pieces are changing
less than 13^64 possible positions


user4362: Chess: 

Chess programming pretty much consists of optimising the tree search. All attempts at introducing "human like knowledge" into the engines have been dropped for more and more sophisticated search heuristics. 
The ultimate goal in chess programming has been reached. In fact one could argue that chess programming overshot it's goal by a mile or two. Since the mid-2000s no human player stands a chance against the top engines. 

Go:

Apart from searching a search tree of possible variations the latest advances in go programming have included such divers techniques as Monte Carlo simulations and neural networks.
The best human players are still stronger than the engines, so arguably there is still more to accomplish. 


9111: <p>Please list the differences between the game of Chess and the game of Go for engine programming in a similar format as this one:</p>

<p>Go:</p>

<ul>
<li>Item 1</li>
<li>Item 2</li>
<li>...</li>
</ul>

<p>Chess:</p>

<ul>
<li>Item 1</li>
<li>Item 2</li>
<li>...</li>
</ul>
 8944: <p>Go:</p>

<ul>
<li>3 type of piece on a square (black, white, none)</li>
<li>huge board (19x19)</li>
<li>pieces appearing on board</li>
<li>close to 3^400 possible positions</li>
</ul>

<p>Chess</p>

<ul>
<li>13 type of pieces on a square (6 black, 6 white, none)</li>
<li>smaller board (8x8)</li>
<li>pieces are changing</li>
<li>less than 13^64 possible positions</li>
</ul>
 4362: <p>Chess: </p>

<ul>
<li>Chess programming pretty much consists of optimising the tree search. All attempts at introducing "human like knowledge" into the engines have been dropped for more and more sophisticated search heuristics. </li>
<li>The ultimate goal in chess programming has been reached. In fact one could argue that chess programming overshot it's goal by a mile or two. Since the mid-2000s no human player stands a chance against the top engines. </li>
</ul>

<p>Go:</p>

<ul>
<li>Apart from searching a search tree of possible variations the latest advances in go programming have included such divers techniques as <a href="http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/D.Silver/web/Applications_files/grand-challenge.pdf" rel="nofollow">Monte Carlo simulations</a> and <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1412.3409" rel="nofollow">neural networks</a>.</li>
<li>The best human players are still stronger than the engines, so arguably there is still more to accomplish. </li>
</ul>
