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.
--------
Question: Context: 'Hi. Water is very important to me. '
Utterance: 'Hello, I don't really need water'

Answer: Yes


Question: Context: 'Okay, well firewood is also my top priority since it will be so cold tonight.  But I would be willing to take only 1 firewood (and give you 2) as long as I got 2 foods and 2 waters ' 'Thank you for the offer on firewood.  I think that sounds fair.  However, I really would like at least 2 waters as well. ' 'Hmm unfortunately I can't budge since I would be accepting less of my top priority item.  It sounds fair to me though; I'd get 5 items in total but less of my top priority and you would get 4 items in total but more of your top priority'
Utterance: 'Well, how about if I take 2 firewoods and all of the food and you can have all of the waters? I have a device that I can make clean water, but will need more calories to do so! 🙂'

Answer: Yes


Question: Context: 'I have firewood, what I need mainly is water, then food' 'Ah, I see. I have plenty of firewood as well but mostly need food and some water.' 'so let me suggest a split, I get two water and two food, you get one food, one water and three firewood'
Utterance: 'I really don't need that much firewood. How about You get two water, one food and one firewood. And I'll take two food, one water and two firewood.'

Answer:
Yes