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: 'I get really sweaty when I hike, so I really need to get at least 2 of the waters.' 'My friend is joining me tomorrow so there will be two of us. I really need the extra water so we both can stay hydrated. You can have all the food and 2 of the firewood packs if I get 2 of the water packs. 🙂' 'I understand, but I don't need any extra firewood.  You could have 2 food, 3 firewood, and 1 water?🙂'
Utterance: 'Well I am going to have to think about this deal. Perhaps I can contact my friend and see if he can get some extra water. He is a big eater so the food may come in handy. '

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'Firewood is my second priority. Can I have 2 of firewood?' 'okay🙂 is it cold so you want firewood?' 'Yes, I get cold easy. Thanks a lot!'
Utterance: 'sure, i have a lot of people coming thats why i need food'

A: No
****
Q: Context: 'That may be possible.... 🙂 What did you have in mind for the food replacement? ' 'You can have all the water if we can have all the food?' 'I dont think I am okay with that ☹️. Food is essential to our groups morale when camping. We would like 1 additional food preferably.'
Utterance: 'Well you guys did say you did not care much about large fires. What if you gave all the firewood in replace for the water and you can still keep 1 food?'

A:
Yes
****