The goal of Rigma is to provide a user friendly client to the
    'Figma' API <https://www.figma.com/developers/api>. It uses the latest
    `httr2` for a stable interface with the REST API. More than 20 methods
    are provided to interact with 'Figma' files, and teams. Get design
    data into R by reading published components and styles, converting and
    downloading images, getting access to the full 'Figma' file as a
    hierarchical data structure, and much more. Enhance your creativity
    and streamline the application development by automating the
    extraction, transformation, and loading of design data to your
    applications and 'HTML' documents.

A set of tools to streamline data analysis. Learning both R and introductory statistics at the same time can be challenging, and so we created 'rigr' to facilitate common data analysis tasks and enable learners to focus on statistical concepts. We provide easy-to-use interfaces for descriptive statistics, one- and two-sample inference, and regression analyses. 'rigr' output includes key information while omitting unnecessary details that can be confusing to beginners. Heteroscedasticity-robust ("sandwich") standard errors are returned by default, and multiple partial F-tests and tests for contrasts are easy to specify. A single regression function can fit both linear and generalized linear models, allowing students to more easily make connections between different classes of models.

Randomization-based inference for average treatment effects in potentially inexactly matched observational studies. It implements the inverse post-matching probability weighting framework proposed by the authors. The post-matching probability calculation follows the approach of Pimentel and Huang (2024) <doi:10.1093/jrsssb/qkae033>. The optimal full matching method is based on Hansen (2004) <doi:10.1198/106186006X137047>. The variance estimator extends the method proposed in Fogarty (2018) <doi:10.1111/rssb.12290> from the perfect randomization settings to the potentially inexact matching case. Comparisons are made with conventional methods, as described in Rosenbaum (2002) <doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3692-2>, Fogarty (2018) <doi:10.1111/rssb.12290>, and Kang et al. (2016) <doi:10.1214/15-aoas894>.