Lots-of-LoRAs/task354_casino_classification_negotiation_no_need huggingface dataset:
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'Hello, how are you today?' 'I am doing good. How about yourself?'
Utterance: 'I am great, i am really excited about going camping, how about you?'
Output: 


Answer: No
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'Hi how are you?' 'I am good. How are You.   I was just thinking about how I need extra water due to a medical condition.  How about I take all 3 waters?' 'I am okay. How about I give you one and half then I get some firewood from you?'
Utterance: 'No I need at least 2 waters.  But I am willing to give you all 3 foods, if I get all the firewood.  Does that work for you?'
Output: 


Answer: No
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'Hello 🙂What would you like to do with this deal?'
Utterance: 'My friend ended up having a medical emergency and couldn't go to the store when I asked her to get food. Because of that, I would like 3 food packages. I had to go help her with the medical forms and didn't have time to shop'
Output: 


Answer: No
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'What if I take 1 more firewood, so I would have 2?' 'I mean I would gladly trade a water and firewood for one of your extra food. ' 'No, I really do need the food the most. Let's go back to your original deal? I'll take 2 foods, you get one. I'll take 1 water, 1 firewood, and you take the rest? Do I have that right?'
Utterance: 'Yup'
Output: 


Answer: No
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'I'm great! Me too! did you have any specific plans? I wanted to make an extra fire to cook with and cook a nice meal. ' 'Yes. I'm actually taking a large group of people. Some friends and family are going and I kind of also wanted a bit of extra firewood. 🙂' 'Oh I get that! I wanted to make a nice meal for my friends so I was hoping to be able to get extra food. 🙂'
Utterance: 'Oh well that's no problem. I'm packing a lot for our group. I'd be willing to give you all the food if you give me all the firewood?'
Output: 


Answer: Yes
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'Hello, how are you today?'
Output: 


Answer: No
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'How about I take all the water and firewood, you can have all the food.'
Output: 


Answer: No
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'I was just negotiating the water for now.  I was trying to do one at a time.' 'ah, I'm definitely ok with doing one at a time: A 2:1 split is definitely OK with me: The issue is, if we consider each individually, it might be harder to come to a deal, but I'm happy to do it your way.' 'How about you take 1 firewood, I''l take 2 and with food, you can have 2 and I'll take one package.  I have two very hungry boys!'
Utterance: 'Is there a reason you want the 2:1 split? Food my group's largest priority by a large margin (We eat a lot). It's worth a lot more to my group then the firewood would be.'
Output: 


Answer: Yes
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'Sorry, I sent my last message inadvertently. I meant to say that that sounds great! Yes, I can understand the need for extra water for the hike. With the size of my family, I could use a bit of extra food for our trip.' 'We can get by with less food since the girls will be looking to forage in the forest to get a badge.' 'That's awesome! Since we have the basics, would you be willing to swap 3 packages of food for 3 packages of water?'
Utterance: 'We will need two food so we can fill their bellies, but I will be glad to offer you all the firewood since I can use my axe and get wood for us.'
Output: 


Answer: Yes
Definition: The input is taken from a negotiation between two participants who take the role of campsite neighbors and negotiate for Food, Water, and Firewood packages, based on their individual preferences and requirements. Given an utterance and recent dialogue context containing past 3 utterances (wherever available), output Yes if the utterance contains the no-need strategy, otherwise output No. no-need is a cooperative negotiation strategy. It is used when a participant points out that they do not need an item based on personal context such as suggesting that they have ample water to spare. no-need can directly benefit the opponent since it implies that the item is up for grabs.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hi, how are you?' 'Great, how are you?' 'Pretty good, planning my camping trip, checking on supplies.'
Utterance: 'Here too, looks like the weather has changed for us. We won't have enough water to last as we forgot it. Food, we have some snacks, but not enough to get by for our trip. I'm not overly concerned about firewood since it's so hot. But I'm really concerned about water.'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello'
Utterance: 'Hello! How are you doing today?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'Hello, what are your preferences for extra supplies?  I am greatly in need of food and water.  We will be doing a lot of activity in a hot, dry climate.🙂' 'I prefer firewood because I will get cold at night. I forgot blankets ☹️' 'Would it work for you, then, to give me the three food and three water, and I can give you all of the firewood?'
Utterance: 'No. Because I brought a water purifier but don't plan on hunting or fishing. So I'd be willing to give up all the water but I want 2 of the food.'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'Oh. Let do some deal. If you give me all water bottles I will give you 2 firewood. Can you accept this' 'i could give you 2 water bottles and 3 food if you can do 3 firewood' 'OK. Are you need Extra food packages?'
Utterance: 'no, I am okay with food which is why I offered them all to you since all my firewood is ruined. I figured if i gave you 2 water and 3 food you might be able to spare the 3 firewood'
Output: 


Answer: Yes