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.

Context: 'I'm like that as well, a small appetite.' 'I need firewood the least of all though, because I have a lot of coats for warmth.' 'Are you bringing several coats while camping?'
Utterance: 'Yeah, I might even have too many.I still need water the most,so I'm thinking I should take the water and you should take the firewood.'
Yes

Context: 'I did, but my friend only feels comfortable with extra around, God forbid, if something happens this could save his life. So I'm thinking, I take all three food packages, two firewood packages and leave all three water and one firewood for you. ' 'I think that it is fair that you get three food and I get three water, but why should you get two firewood to my one?' 'The food is not for me, I'm not allowed to touch it. t\The only real benefit I'm getting here is firewood. ☹️'
Utterance: 'OK,that sounds good. So you get three Food, I get three Water, and we split the Firewood, you get two and I get one.'
No

Context: 'I would like water more than food. ' 'How many wood do you think you need?' 'I would like 2 of the firewood. What do you think? '
Utterance: 'I don't need wood as I am usually warm so I think we can work out a deal. I like to have more water and I usually get thirsty.'

Yes