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: 'if i give you all the food items, will you give me the firewood?' 'I was thinking maybe you can have 2 firewood and 3 waters. And I could take 1 firewood and 3 food?' 'that sounds fair'
Utterance: 'Okay sounds good to me, thank you! 🙂'

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'What type of place are you thinking of going camping to? Like what is the climate/area? More desert or forest, etc?' 'Forest, for sure. Deserts have scorpions and tarantulas and I'm scared of those.' 'Amen! Me too! 🙂 I too was thinking of going to the forest. Is your forest going to be wet or pretty dry?'
Utterance: 'It'll be pretty dry. I don't want to catch a cold. '

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'Being that you're getting 2 of 3 of the item (food) that for me is the highest value, I think it's only fair that I get all 3 of the medium value items (firewood) and one of the low value item (water). That would give me 5 packages and you 4 packages, but 2 of 4 of your packages are the high value items.' 'Okay then. I agree with you.. Shall we finalize our deal. I will take the 2 packages of food and 2 packages of water.r.🙂' 'Yes, I find that an acceptable deal.'
Utterance: 'Okay. Nice to meet you. Have a nice day🙂'

A:
No
****