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.

[EX Q]: Context: 'Okay, it seems we both have the same priorities in food most and firewood second most. How about this, you take 2 packages of food, I will take 1. You give me 2 packages of firewood I will give you 1. We will then divide the water. Is that fair?' 'That sounds really fair! 🙂' 'Would you be willing to give me 2 water and you take 1?'
Utterance: 'I'll agree to that!'
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Context: 'I really need water though. Are you sure you need that much?' 'Yes please ..! My son has respiratory problems I'll definitely need that 😡😡😡' 'If you really need water, then can I have 2 firewood and 3 food then?'
Utterance: 'No I really need food also ...at least I will take 3 food and 2 water and you can take remaining'
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Context: 'I need a lot of food today. I was advised to eat at least 4 times a day so i may need all the food packages.' 'Well that is not going to work well for my family of 8 now is it? Haha. I think we can come to some sort of agreement though.🙂' 'What do you propose?'
Utterance: 'I really need food too, but I am willing to deal and let my kids go hungry I guess ☹️ I propose I get one food, 3 firewood and 1 water.  '
[EX A]:
Yes