We Keep Coding

Noisy 3D point cloud to interpolated surface mesh in python

My general goal is going from a noisy point cloud describing a surface, to a regular surface mesh, in Python. I have found a few solution to this problem, none of which apply to my case well enough. The best ones I found:
B-spline -> sample it -> get new points. This calculates the z values of a function based on a regular set of x,y coordinates, which won't work well for near-vertical surfaces, of which I have a lot.
Rolling ball / convex hull algorithms. My data is noisy along the normal to the surface, so I would get a surface that's "inflated". I would need first to denoise it, which itself requires the calculation of a spline, or something similar.
I feel like there must be an "easy" way to do this, but I just don't know what to look for. Can someone point me in the right direction?
My best guess is that there should be a way to sample a spline surface "regularly" relatively to itself, but I can't figure out how.

The problem which you describe is named surface reconstruction. There is many algorithms and software (standalone program or libraries) able to reconstruct one surface from a set of sample points. There is important differences depending if you have only the XYZ coordinates of the points, or you have more information as the color or the normal to the surface.
Naming some examples, you can use:
Screened Poisson, by Kazhdan and Bolitho. Which is implemented in meshlab, and many other python libraries. Probably your best option.
PowerCRUST, by Nina Amenta, Sunghee Choi and Ravi Kolluri.
Ball Pivoting, by Bernardini, Mittleman, et al. Quite simple and easy to implement by yourself.

How to determine whether a point is inside or outside a 3D model computationally

I have a .obj and .ply file of a 3D model.
What I want to do is read this 3D model file and see if a list of 3D coordinates are either inside or outside the 3D model space.
For example, if the 3D model is a sphere with radius 1, (0,0,0) would be inside (True) and (2,0,0) would be outside (False). Of course the 3D model I'm using is not as simple as a sphere.
I would like to add some of the methods I considered using.
Since I am using Python, I thought of using PyMesh, as their intersection feature looked promising. However the list of coordinates I have are not mesh files but just vectors, so it didn't seem to be the appropriate function to use.
I also found this method using ray casting. However, how to do this with PyMesh, or any other Python tool is something I need advice on.

Cast a ray from the 3D point along X-axis and check how many intersections with outer object you find.
Depending on the intersection number on each axis (even or odd) you can understand if your point is inside or outside.
You may want to repeat on Y and Z axes to improve the result (sometimes your ray is coincident with planar faces and intersection number is not reliable).

Converting my comment into an answer for future readers.
You can use a Convex Hull library to check whether a point is inside the hull. Most libraries use signed distance function to determine whether the point is inside. trimesh is one of the libraries that implements this feature.

Sort points in 2D space to make a spline

I have a sequence of points which are distributed in 2D space. They represent a shape but they are not ordered. So, I can plot them as points to give an idea of the shape, but if I plot the line connecting them, I miss the shape because the order of points is not the right order of connection.
I'm wondering, how can I put them in the right order such that, if I connect them one by one in sequence, I get a spline showing the shape they represent? I found and tried the convex hull in Matlab but with no results. The shape could be complex, for example a star and with convex hull I get a shape that is too much simplified (many points are not taken into account).
Thanks for help!
EDIT
Could be everything the image. I've randomly created one to show you a possible case, with some parts that are coming into the shape, and also points can have different distances.
I've tried with convex hull function in Matlab, that's what I get. Every time the contour have a "sharp corner", I miss it and the final shape is not what I'm looking for. Also, Matlab function has no parameter to set to change convex hull result (at least I can't see anything in the help).
hull = convhull(coords(:,1),coords(:,2));
plot(coords(hull,1),coords(hull,2),'.r');

You need to somehow order your points, so they can be in a sequence; in the case of your drawing example, the points can likely be ordered using the minimal distance, to the next -not yet used- point, starting at one end (you'll probably have to provide the end).
Then you can draw a spline, maybe using Chaikin's algorithm for curves that will locally approximate a bezier curve.
You need to start working on this, and post another question with your code, if you are having difficulties.

Alpha shapes may perform better than convexhulls for this problem. Alpha shapes will touch all the points in the exterior of a point cloud, even can carve out holes.
But for complicated shape reconstruction, I would recommend you to try a beta-skeleton bsed approach discussed in https://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~jrs/meshpapers/AmentaBernEppstein.pdf
See more details on β-Skeleton at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta_skeleton
Quote from the linked article:
The circle-based β-skeleton may be used in image analysis to reconstruct the shape of a two-dimensional object, given a set of sample points on the boundary of the object (a computational form of the connect the dots puzzle where the sequence in which the dots are to be connected must be deduced by an algorithm rather than being given as part of the puzzle).
it is possible to prove that the choice β = 1.7 will correctly reconstruct the entire boundary of any smooth surface, and not generate any edges that do not belong to the boundary, as long as the samples are generated sufficiently densely relative to the local curvature of the surface
Cheers

Optimizing scipy.spatial.Delaunay.find_simplex

I have a set of points in a plane where each point has an associated altitude. I'm thinking of using the scipy.spatial library to compute the Delaunay triangulation of the point set and then use the result to interpolate for the points in between.
The library implements a nice function that, given a point, finds the triangle it lies in. This would be particularly useful when calculating the depth map from the mesh. I assume though (please do correct me if I'm wrong) that the search function searches from the same starting point every time it is called. Since the points I will be looking for will tend to lie either on the triangle the previous one lied on or on an adjacent one, I figure that's unneccessary, but can't seem to find a way to optimize the search, other than to implement it myself.
Is there a way to set the initial triangle for the search, or to optimize the depth map calculation otherwise?

You can try point in location test, especially Kirkpatrick algorithm/data structure. Basically you subdivide the mesh in both axis and re-triangulate it. A better and simpler solution is to give each triangle a color and draw a bitmap then check the color of the bitmap with the point.

Pipeline to create Voronoi Meshes

I would like to implement a Maya plugin (this question is independent from Maya) to create 3D Voronoi patterns, Something like
I just know that I have to start from point sampling (I implemented the adaptive poisson sampling algorithm described in this paper).
I thought that, from those points, I should create the 3D wire of the mesh applying Voronoi but the result was something different from what I expected.
Here are a few example of what I get handling the result i get from scipy.spatial.Voronoi like this (as suggested here):
vor = Voronoi(points)
for vpair in vor.ridge_vertices:
for i in range(len(vpair) - 1):
if all(x >= 0 for x in vpair):
v0 = vor.vertices[vpair[i]]
v1 = vor.vertices[vpair[i+1]]
create_line(v0.tolist(), v1.tolist())
The grey vertices are the sampled points (the original shape was a simple sphere):
Here is a more complex shape (an arm)
I am missing something? Can anyone suggest the proper pipeline and algorithms I have to implement to create such patterns?

I saw your question since you posted it but didn’t have a real answer for you, however as I see you still didn’t get any response I’ll at least write down some ideas from me. Unfortunately it’s still not a full solution for your problem.
For me it seems you’re mixing few separate problems in this question so it would help to break it down to few pieces:
Voronoi diagram:
The diagram is by definition infinite, so when you draw it directly you should expect a similar mess you’ve got on your second image, so this seems fine. I don’t know how the SciPy does that, but the implementation I’ve used flagged some edge ends as ‘infinite’ and provided me the edges direction, so I could clip it at some distance by myself. You’ll need to check the exact data you get from SciPy.
In the 3D world you’ll almost always want to remove such infinite areas to get any meaningful rendering, or at least remove the area that contains your camera.
Points generation:
The Poisson disc is fine as some sample data or for early R&D but it’s also the most boring one :). You’ll need more ways to generate input points.
I tried to imagine the input needed for your ball-like example and I came up with something like this:
Create two spheres of points, with the same center but different radius.
When you create a Voronoi diagram out of it and remove infinite areas you should end up with something like a football ball.
If you created both spheres randomly you’ll get very irregular boundaries of the ‘ball’, but if you scale the points of one sphere, to use for the 2nd one you should get a regular mesh, similar to ball. You can also use similar points, but add some random offset to control the level of surface irregularity.
Get your computed diagram and for each edge create few points along this edge - this will give you small areas building up the edges of bigger areas. Play with random offsets again. Try to ignore edges, that doesn't touch any infinite region to get result similar to your image.
Get the points from both stages and compute the diagram once more.
Mesh generation:
Up to now it didn’t look like your target images. In fact it may be really hard to do it with production quality (for a Maya plugin) but I see some tricks that may help.
What I would try first would be to get all my edges and extrude some circle along them. You may modulate circle size to make it slightly bigger at the ends. Then do Boolean ‘OR’ between all those meshes and some Mesh Smooth at the end.
This way may give you similar results but you’ll need to be careful at mesh intersections, they can get ugly and need some special treatment.