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: 'Yeah, it's very sad these days' 'Then I got here and noticed I didn't pack my cooking sterno and critters go into some of my food☹️Kinda puts a damper on the trip.' 'Oh, i see. How about you get 2 food 1 firewood and 1 water. I need the extra firewood to stay warm at night'
Utterance: 'Yeah, that should work. I brought plenty of water and the critters left that alone. You planning to go out on the trails at all?'
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 there. I do not have a large family so i will give up on the food but i do have a medical condition where i have trouble regulating my temperature and need lots of fluids'
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. so what are you thinking about this whole situation?' 'Hey, I think that this is nice, we get to go camping and get extra stuff. But definitely need more food and firewood'
Utterance: 'Yeah, I think I'm okay with firewood, but I'd really like more food and 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: 'That's a little tough for me but if we can come to an agreement where I get 2 of the food, I'd be willing to play ball.  We both deserve a good camping trip, after all.' 'That's true. We both deserve a good trip. Why do you need more food?' 'Because I planned to go hiking and it wouldn't leave me time to chop much of any myself.  Even if I did, I'd have to carry it back and that's obviously not very smart in this heat.  But if I had the extra food, I'd be willing to inconvenience myself with getting firewood and cutting my hike a little short because I know the firewood is important to you.'
Utterance: 'You're right. I do not plan on hiking so you need more food than me. If I am correct, would I get 3 firewood/1 food while you get 3 water/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 would like two firewoods and two food. You can take everything else. Does that work for you?' 'That might work. What reasons do you have for needing those?' 'I want to make smores and a nice dinner'
Utterance: 'I feel like I might need more firewood, I'm staying in the desert and it gets cold at night.'
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' 'Hi there.. how are you doing today?  I hope well!  🙂  So, it looks like we need to divy up these supplies, huh?  Do you have any thoughts on the issue?' 'I'm doing fine thank you, how about you? Well for my trip I'm most interesting in socializing so a great campfire a night would be great, I'd prefer not to boil water either so want extra of that too. Food less so as I will go fishing and know wild vegetables, fruits and mushrooms I can pick. How about you?'
Utterance: 'Awesome.. it seems like we're kind of on the same page here then as I'm going to need food for my people since they're not real self-sufficient but I'm less neurotic about the water or the firewood.. we're from Florida so we actually kind of like the cooler weather anyway.. lol'
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 fellow camper! I am interested to know your preference in items?'
Utterance: 'Hello! Yes I'm excited for the trip. 🙂 My most important is food. 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: 'Same. Plus I am planning on keeping a fire long into the night. Eating alot of food also helps keep you warm while sleeping. Perhaps I could offer you some extra food in return for some extra firewood?' 'Hmm I will have to think about this offer. How do you feel about the water packages?' 'I am a water junkie day to day but the place I am camping as a stream and I'm taking my water filter system, so I could offer you extra water in this case.'
Utterance: 'That is very considerate of 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: 'True we can , I'd be willing to just take one of the foods if you'd be willing to do that ? Then we can decide on the others ' '🙂v it sound's like we're on the right track! I'll gladly take 2 Food. How would you feel about taking all of the Water, while I take all of the Firewood?' 'Not really liking that , but I'd be willing to split the water with you if I could take 2 of those 🙂'
Utterance: 'OK, you take 2 of the Water, and I take 1. That just leaves the Firewood. How about 2 for me and 1 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: 'That is great.  Looks like we are on our way to making a deal.  How do you feel about wood?  ' 'I would prefer less wood so that's great' 'I do not like camping and find comfort in food, so I would like to take all the extra food that I can.  '
Utterance: 'I think that can be negoiated then i tend to eat less on camping trips'
Output: 


Answer: Yes