You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
Robots can generalize manipulation skills between different scenarios by adapting to the features of the objects being manipulated. Selecting the set of relevant features for generalizing skills has usually been performed manually by a human. Alternatively, a robot can learn to select relevant features autonomously. However, feature selection usually requires a large amount of training data, which would require many demonstrations. In order to learn the relevant features more efficiently, we propose using a meta-level prior to transfer the relevance of features from previously learned skills. The experiments show that the meta-level prior more than doubles the average precision and recall of the feature selection when compared to a standard uniform prior. The proposed approach was used to learn a variety of manipulation skills, including pushing, cutting, and pouring.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: We discuss vision as a sensory modality for systems that interact flexibly with uncontrolled environments. Instead of trying to build a generic vision system that produces task-independent representations, we argue in favor of task-specific, learn-able representations. This concept is illustrated by two examples of our own work. First, our RLVC algorithm performs reinforcement learning directly on the visual input space. To make this very large space manageable, RLVC interleaves the reinforcement learner with a supervised classification algorithm that seeks to split perceptual states so as to reduce perceptual aliasing. This results in an adaptive discretization of the perceptual space based on the presence or absence of visual features. Its extension, RLJC, additionally handles continuous action spaces. In contrast to the minimalistic visual representations produced by RLVC and RLJC, our second method learns structural object models for robust object detection and pose estimation by probabilistic inference. To these models, the method associates grasp experiences autonomously learned by trial and error. These experiences form a non-parametric representation of grasp success likelihoods over gripper poses, which we call a grasp density. Thus, object detection in a novel scene simultaneously produces suitable grasping options.

[2]: Policy search methods can allow robots to learn control policies for a wide range of tasks, but practical applications of policy search often require hand-engineered components for perception, state estimation, and low-level control. In this paper, we aim to answer the following question: does training the perception and control systems jointly end-to-end provide better performance than training each component separately? To this end, we develop a method that can be used to learn policies that map raw image observations directly to torques at the robot's motors. The policies are represented by deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) with 92,000 parameters, and are trained using a guided policy search method, which transforms policy search into supervised learning, with supervision provided by a simple trajectory-centric reinforcement learning method. We evaluate our method on a range of real-world manipulation tasks that require close coordination between vision and control, such as screwing a cap onto a bottle, and present simulated comparisons to a range of prior policy search methods.
Some frameworks learn relevant features in order to select actions more accurately in otherwise ambiguous situations [1] [2] . These approaches often perform an implicit pose estimation of an object or part, which the robot can then use to adapt its actions. However, the features are usually learned for specific sets of objects and not to generalize between objects with different shapes.