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.

Q: Context: 'Oh, that does change things a lot. Diabetes is a hard disease to have to deal with. So you want more firewood than water? And less food than water?' 'Well, I don't know.  I think I would like more water than firewood, but yes less food than water.  I'm a pretty easy going person though! 🙂' 'Ok, let me know what you think and we will go from there. I do prefer more food and firewood than water though.'
Utterance: 'Okay, it sounds like we are pretty agreeable here.  I will wait for you to make an offer if you would like to.'

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'I was more thinking 2 Firewood for me , 1 food and 1 water? The rest would be yours.' 'That is a promising bargain but I want at least 2 firewood, it makes for a fun time for my group.' 'Interesting , because my group feels the same way though. How does your group feel about water though?'
Utterance: 'Water is not that important for us but the firewood is a deal breaker for us ☹️'

A: Yes
****
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'

A:
No
****