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 uv-part strategy, otherwise output No. uv-part is a selfish negotiation strategy. It is used to undermine the requirements of the opponent. For instance, suggesting that the opponent would not need more firewood since they already have the basic supplies or a suggestion that there might be a store near the campsite where the opponent can get the supplies instead.

Q: Context: '🙂 Well let me counter it, more beneficial to both of us, you will get 1 water, 2 food and 2 firewood as I can easily find firewood in the forest.  The water due to my dry mouth illness, I need the most ☹️' 'Oh yes excuse me, I got confused, if you need water for me it's okay to give you the water you need.' 'Okay so my offer is good for you and me? 🙂'
Utterance: ', Yes, I agree with that offer.🙂'

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'I could manage with one firewood and two foods, but if you have canteens for everyone, may I then have all three waters? I had planned to collect water from the river, but I'm worried I may get sick.' 'you pointed out that we will need more!  😮 i will take 2 waters' 'I didn't know you had supplied everyone with water before the trip. I was merely trying to look out for your needs, but you said you didn't need them!'
Utterance: 'I am giving you a lot of food. You are being unreasonable and backtracking. You are getting some of everything with my offers, and there are only two of you.'

A: Yes
****
Q: Context: 'Hi! I am interesting in claiming all 3 of the water, as well as 2 firewood and 1 food. Does this work for you?'
Utterance: 'No I need more firewood'

A:
No
****