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.

Let me give you an example: Context: 
Utterance: 'how about I give you 2 waters and 1 food package in exchange for all your firewood?'
The answer to this example can be: No
Here is why: The utterance does not use the no-need strategy since it never refers to an item that the participant does not need.

OK. solve this:
Context: 'Just need a little more wood.  Then it will be great to cook my dinner on.' 'I got some spare wood. I’m a little short on food though. I didn’t pack enough. ' 'Great, we can split the food, how are you on water?'
Utterance: 'That would be great. I need to have frequent small meals throughout the day so the extra food would help. I have plenty of water. '
Answer:
Yes