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: 'Thats a shame, i am sure you would like it if you give it a try, especially if you build a large fire 🙂' 'I was going to say, the fire would be probably one of the few things I would be interested in! I love being warm.' 'Well you can take all the firewood if it will help, would it be ok if i get all the food in return?'
Utterance: 'That works for me. How would you like to divide the water?'
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Context: 'Yes! Hope for lot of fun. Is there any special deal can you offer for maximum order.' 'What item are you looking for the most of?  ' 'Water and food is on high need than the firewood. Expect for the best combo for food and water.'
Utterance: 'I brought plenty of water.  I think I could give you all 3 water. Food is what I need the most of so wonder if I took 2 packages of food and left you 1?'
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Context: 'awesome, you can have 3 water and i'll take 3 food?' '🙂 I am fine with it. How about the firewood?' 'i'll take 2, you can have 1? '
Utterance: 'Firewood is my second priority. Can I have 2 of firewood?'
[EX A]:
No