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: 'We want to hike along the trails near the river! We will need lots of food to keep us going ' 'I understand that atleast you are going to be close to water, that will be our most important thing since we will be thirsty and you know kids and trying to tell them to ration the water...LOL' 'for sure thats not going to work to well '
Utterance: 'are you hiking alone?'
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 need more food since I have a huge family. Can you give me all food i give you all water?' 'i need a little more food because i forgot that we where staying longer and i forgot some of my food. Can i give you 1 food package please? '
Utterance: 'Food is what I need most. I can not survive with less than 2 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 can definitely relate to that, I have family members with type 2 so I know how bad that can get' 'Yes definitely! It is a pain for sure, but I love camping so I still want to go! I just have to make sure I have all the supplies I need. ' 'I can do without extra water as long as I have food and firewood to purify water I find.  It might be better for you to have a reliable supply though.'
Utterance: 'That totally makes sense! I actually am good on firewood thankfully, I got some from a person selling it from their yard a little bit ago.'
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: 'Hi. I'm most interested in water. What's your highest priority?' 'I really need water too. I have a young baby and will do a lot of washing.' 'Okay. I'm not especially worried about food. What's your lowest priority?'
Utterance: 'I have enough food too. Can I take 2 water, 1 firewood and 2 food?'
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: 'Hi - I can understand that. I have quite a few mouths to feed as well' 'hmmm, well what are you looking to get' 'Well, I think that for us staying warm is more important than having extra food. What if I took extra fire wood and you took extra food?'
Utterance: 'That could work, were not really looking to have a big fire'
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: 'Hello, I hope we can work together on an offer that benefits both of us. Do you think it's OK?🙂' 'Yes definitely!  I am pretty easy to work with and would like a deal that will help us both out as much as possible.' ' The item I need the most is water because I need to hydrate to stay strong and achieve my goals. And you?'
Utterance: 'I would say water as well because I am very active and build up thirst as a result.  However, I would be willing to compromise on things to allow you to have more water.'
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: 'if i give you all the food items, will you give me the firewood?' 'I was thinking maybe you can have 2 firewood and 3 waters. And I could take 1 firewood and 3 food?' 'that sounds fair'
Utterance: 'Okay sounds good to me, thank 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: 'I did, but my friend only feels comfortable with extra around, God forbid, if something happens this could save his life. So I'm thinking, I take all three food packages, two firewood packages and leave all three water and one firewood for you. ' 'I think that it is fair that you get three food and I get three water, but why should you get two firewood to my one?' 'The food is not for me, I'm not allowed to touch it. t\The only real benefit I'm getting here is firewood. ☹️'
Utterance: 'OK,that sounds good. So you get three Food, I get three Water, and we split the Firewood, you get two and I get one.'
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 agree, it will be tricky to find extra food while camping. I'm sure we can figure out something that works for both of us... the water is also very important to me because it's supposed to be hot. There is plenty of wood where I'm going, so you can have the firewood. Would you be willing to take 3 firewood, 1 food and 1 food?' 'I would like at least 2 food, how does me getting 2 food, 1 water,2 firewood sound?' 'I think I can only give away 2 food if you are willing to give up all of the water. How about you take 2 food and 2 firewood? '
Utterance: 'I think that sounds reasonable, i dont get too thirsty!'
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: 'Would you be willing to trade a piece of firewood for an extra water bottle? That will save me some time from chopping down extra wood.' 'no, best i can offer is i get 3 firewood, 2 water and 1 food' 'No thanks.☹️'
Utterance: 'ok, last deal, i get 3 firewood, 1 water and 1 food'
Output: 


Answer: No