Var. + X-ray (only) & 5 & 4 & 80\
\
\
All three & 34 & 22 & 65

In Figure \[fig:VennCand\] and Table \[tab:selectionresults\], we present our yields from this observing run, divided by the selection method. The mid-IR-selected sources were divided into several classes (QSO-Aa, QSO-Ab, etc.; see Section \[sec:mIRsel\]). As expected the purest class, QSO-Aa, has the highest confirmation rate, at 24%. Next, the two classes QSO-Ab and QSO-Ba had confirmation rates of 20% and 19%, respectively. The YSO-Aa and YSO-Ab groups have lower rates of 13% and 6%, as expected from the original division into YSO and QSO classes. Variability selection had a yield of 31% and X-ray selection 30%.

Priority 7 objects, where the source was flagged based on only one of the mid-IR, variability or X-ray criteria, had confirmation rates of 13% (57 new AGNs), 7% (8), and 5% (1), respectively. Of the priority 8 objects selected by any two methods but not the third, the combination of X-ray plus variability yielded the highest confirmation rate, at 80% (4 new AGNs), most likely due to low number statistics. The mid-IR and variability criteria had a yield of 38% (73 AGNs) and X-ray plus 