Q: 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: 'That's a little tough for me but if we can come to an agreement where I get 2 of the food, I'd be willing to play ball. We both deserve a good camping trip, after all.' 'That's true. We both deserve a good trip. Why do you need more food?' 'Because I planned to go hiking and it wouldn't leave me time to chop much of any myself. Even if I did, I'd have to carry it back and that's obviously not very smart in this heat. But if I had the extra food, I'd be willing to inconvenience myself with getting firewood and cutting my hike a little short because I know the firewood is important to you.'
Utterance: 'You're right. I do not plan on hiking so you need more food than me. If I am correct, would I get 3 firewood/1 food while you get 3 water/2 food?'
A:
Yes