Comparing SVM and logistic regression Can someone please give me some intuition as to when to choose either SVM or LR? I want to understand the intuition behind what is the difference between the optimization criteria of learning the hyperplane of the two, where the respective aims are as follows:  


*

*SVM: Try to maximize the margin between the closest support vectors

*LR: Maximize the posterior class probability 


Let's consider the linear feature space for both SVM and LR.
Some differences I know of already:


*

*SVM is deterministic (but we can use Platts model for probability score) while LR is probabilistic.

*For the kernel space, SVM is faster (stores just support vectors)

 A: Linear SVMs and logistic regression generally perform comparably in practice. Use SVM with a nonlinear kernel if you have reason to believe your data won't be linearly separable (or you need to be more robust to outliers than LR will normally tolerate). Otherwise, just try logistic regression first and see how you do with that simpler model. If logistic regression fails you, try an SVM with a non-linear kernel like a RBF.
EDIT:
Ok, let's talk about where the objective functions come from. 
The logistic regression comes from generalized linear regression. A good discussion of the logistic regression objective function in this context can be found here: https://stats.stackexchange.com/a/29326/8451
The Support Vector Machines algorithm is much more geometrically motivated. Instead of assuming a probabilistic model, we're trying to find a particular optimal separating hyperplane, where we define "optimality" in the context of the support vectors. We don't have anything resembling the statistical model we use in logistic regression here, even though the linear case will give us similar results: really this just means that logistic regression does a pretty good job of producing "wide margin" classifiers, since that's all SVM is trying to do (specifically, SVM is trying to "maximize" the margin between the classes).
I'll try to come back to this later and get a bit deeper into the weeds, I'm just sort of in the middle of something :p
A: 
Image signifies the difference between SVM and Logistic Regression and where to use which method
this picture comes from the coursera course : "machine learning" by Andrew NG. It can be found in week 7 at the end of: "Support vector machines - using an SVM"
A: *

*LR gives calibrated probabilities that can be interpreted as
confidence in a decision.

*LR gives us an unconstrained, smooth objective.

*LR can be (straightforwardly) used within Bayesian models.

*SVMs don’t penalize examples for which the correct decision is
made with sufficient confidence. This may be good for
generalization.

*SVMs have a nice dual form, giving sparse solutions when
using the kernel trick (better scalability)

Check out Support Vector Machines
vs Logistic Regression, University of Toronto CSC2515 by Kevin Swersky.
A: I think another advantage of LR is that it's actually optimising the weights of an interpretable function (e.g. Y = B0 + B1X1 +B2X2, where X1 and X2 are your predictor variables/features). This means that you could use the model with pen, paper and a basic scientific calculator and get a probability output if you wanted to. 
All you have to do is calculate Y with the above optimised function, and plug Y into the sigmoid function to get a class probability between 0 and 1.
This might be useful in some fields/applications, although less and less as we move forward and can just plug numbers into an app and get a result from the model.
