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: 'I'm well! Excited for this camping trip.' 'Same! I'm a little worried about some of my supplies though. What about you?' 'Likewise! What are you most in need of?'
Utterance: 'Well, I'm camping up on a snowy mountain and I gave some of my food away to hikers who were passing me and were very tired and hungry, so I'd really like to get some more food. Firewood would be useful too, although I do have a thick coat and a sleeping bag. I plan on melting the snow to get water, so I don't think I'll need that too much. And you?'
[A]: Yes


[Q]: Context: 'But these are only additional packages☹️' 'I get that and understand completely. I have a large number of mouths to feed making the food a necessity or all the firewood to cook whatever we hunt. How many you have?' 'I have three.'
Utterance: 'I have 8. That is 5 more people to feed for 3 meals per day....'
[A]: No


[Q]: Context: 'So I get only 3 packages? 2 food and 1 firewood? ' 'Do you need more firewood?  I could compromise there.' 'How about I get 2 food and 2 firewood? You can get all the water plus 1 food and 1 firewood? '
Utterance: 'Yes that sounds fair.  Deal.  '
[A]:
No