In general, when you have to place several figures in one floating
figure, you can use \subflot in subfig package. You can give label to
each subfigure.


Section 5.3 & 5.4

I think these sections are good enough to reproduce the experiment.

Figure 6 and Figure 7: I didn't understand these two figures. What do
blue curves and green curves on ROC plot refer to? I think it is
better to label each curve. Also, how is overlapping ROC curves
interpreted as indistinguishable?

Table 5: Maybe I would add some explanations about what each column
means.

Figure 8: "different assumed" -> "differently assumed"


Conclusion
I feel like conclusion generally makes sense.

1st paragraph

The last sentence sounds a bit surprising to me, since when you say
"We have also identified other quantities of interest", it doesn't
really say how you identified those quantities, and given that this
sentence is about ROC curves, it may sound like "ROC curves have
identified other quantities". I would change as "Also, while other
quantities of interest are identified in log-linear model, such as the
positive and negative predictive value, those are obscured when
analyzed by ROC curve solely."

2nd paragraph

I feel like "which has been well-established in the statistical
community for other categorical data analyses." doesn't fit well on
conclusion; since that fact does not give direct support for why
log-linear model is good. I would move that part to Chapter 4, where
log-linear model is introduced.

3rd paragraph

"Through a simulation study, we have illustrated both the robustness
of the log-linear model approach and the variability in ROC curves
once this uncertainty is taken into account." -> "Once this
uncertainty is taken into account, we have illustrated both the
robustness of the log-linear model approach and the variability in ROC
curves through a simulation study": Since "uncertantity" is mentioned
in the previous sentence, I would put that phrase to the beginning.

4th paragraph

I feel like 1st and 3rd sentences are about "better understanding
between different lineup conditions", and the 2nd and 4th sentences
are about gap between lab studies and criminal justice system. I would
rather put one sentence at the beginning pointing these two issues,
and then arrange sentences as 1->3->2->4.