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.

[EX Q]: Context: 'That will be very unfair of you. How am i going to survive without water or food?' 'You have food and water, this is just extra supplies' 'I know but with my condition i may not make it, especially without more water.😮'
Utterance: 'you can make water by boiling water with all that extra firewood you got'
[EX A]: Yes

[EX Q]: Context: 'Hello there! It's nice to meet you. Truthfully, I need to get some food and some firewood. What do you need?' 'The main thing I like to do when camping is a lot of hiking (pretty much all day), so I was hoping to get as much food as possible so I can remain active.' 'I'm sure we can come up with a compromise! I understand the need for extra food with exercise. Sometimes I get low blood sugar and need an extra snack. I'll give you 2 food if I can get 1.'
Utterance: 'I think that is a totally fair split for the food. And I actually don't need a lot of firewood. I would be willing to give you all of it in exchange for the water.'
[EX A]: No

[EX Q]: Context: 'Ok, what would you counter offer with?' 'I would like all 3 packages of firewood and 1 package of food. You can have the rest.' 'Well, I would like at least one firewood, it is the thing I most need.'
Utterance: 'But you need firewood for leisure, whereas I need firewood for survival.'
[EX A]:
Yes

