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 self-need strategy, otherwise output No. self-need is a selfish negotiation strategy. It is used to create a personal need for an item in the negotiation, such as by pointing out that the participant sweats a lot to show preference towards water packages.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'That sounds pretty reasonable as I am in need of firewood the most. Would it be most reasonable to each take what we need most and split the water down the middle?' 'Yes, it would.' 'I think that sounds fair. The problem is that there are 3 waters and one of us would get two and the other one. How should we sort that?'
Utterance: 'You can take the two water. I am not that thirsty most days.'
Output: No

Positive Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'hello, how are you today?' 'Great.  Though I am a bit stressed.  I could use a camping trip. ' 'yes, me too. i am going to one. but i need some food.'
Utterance: 'Yeah.  I like to go for long hikes so for that I need water and food.  '
Output: Yes

Negative Example 1 -
Input: Context: 'Hello. I am so looking forward to this camp out. My daughter just called and said she is going to come and bring some of her firiends. 🙂' 'Hello! That sounds pretty reasonable to me. I was going out with a bunch of my buddies. We like to hike a lot in the sun, so we need lots of water. How does it sound if i take all the food and water, but you get all the firewood?' 'I love hiking. My daughter is bringing extra water. So we could trade the water for the firewood. We do need just a little food as I didn't plan on having an extra person.'
Utterance: 'Hmm, okay, that sounds reasonable. How does 3 water, 2 food and 1 firewood for me, and all the rest for you sound?'
Output: Yes

Negative Example 2 -
Input: Context: 'we want to explore the animals in the area birds and just enjoy all the nice views.' 'Cool, that sounds very nice and relaxing 🙂. It kinda sounds like my husband, he likes to do things like these with no concrete plan and just decides on the spot what he wants to do. The only problem with it is that he dumps all the planning on me so I have to make sure I have extra of ANY possible idea he has.' 'Yes we always get stuck making the plans so can I have 2 firewood and you get 2 food and 2 water? Please respond a little faster with your messages that would be very nice'
Utterance: 'Unfortunately, I need the firewood to make campfires. Since you are planning to cook a romantic camping meal, don't you need food?'
Output: No

Now complete the following example -
Input: Context: 'what i mean by prevention of excess is that we should focus on getting excess and not to limit it regardless of what we already have because if we should offer some creative approaches by excess. we can both come to an agreement if you are interested.' 'Okay. Lets just try to do some negotiation. I am the most interested in getting more WATER. The water I already have at the campsite looks dirty so, if it is okay with you, I would like all THREE of them. My food has also been stolen by bears and I don't make much left, so I would like TWO of the food items. You can have all the firewood and the other food item. How does that sound? 🙂' '😮Sound good enough but since you know i can not do without having anything to sustain me whenever i am thirsty then i suggest you are free to take TWO of the water and since your food has also been stolen by bears and you don't make much left, then you can have the TWO of the food items too and leave the THREE firewood for me with ONE food. How does that sound? 🙂'
Utterance: 'I think we are getting very close to a good deal. Would you be willing to give me ONE firewood in case the stuff I have gets wet?'
Output: 


Answer: Yes