Bug Fixes and convergence testing

@adamhooper This PR addresses the bugs you caught last time (e.g. it uses a better font stack, clearer names, etc). Re the most substantive issue—how to stream from the server—it sends a blob of data every time the server processes 100 documents. This is roughly analogous to having the server send new data every x milliseconds. But doing it after a certain number of documents, rather than after a certain number of milliseconds, was more convenient: first, because timers are a pain, but also because it simplified my implementation of convergence testing (by simplifying the logic for predicting when the doc set will converge).

Re the convergence testing: obviously, this isn't statistically valid until the docs are coming back in a random order. But I figured I'd get the code ready anyway. On the Pitchfork doc set @jstray gave me, the wordcloud converged (meaning that the cosine similarity between wordcloud n and wordcloud n+1 was > .9999) after only 2,800 docs. (It's a 13,200 document set.) As a result, the server was able to return the "final" data in ~6 seconds, as opposed to ~17 seconds before. So we got a 3x speedup, even though we're only processing 1/5 as many docs. We didn't get a bigger bump because we're processing the token data (i.e. finding the top tokens and, now, computing computing the cosine similarity) more often; now we're doing it once per 100 docs until convergence, whereas before we were only doing it the 5 times we were responding. It'll be interesting to see how we can set `incrementSize` to minimize total response time (i.e. balance fewer times processing the tokens against converging after reading fewer docs).
This is awesome.

It's also incorrect in a couple of ways:

1. We haven't proven anything about random docsets, and we haven't randomized the docset.
2. It can go backwards. Progress bars should never, ever go backwards.

I'd be more comfortable after reading some theory about why this works -- e.g., what is the probability of the progress bar going backwards? The comments are a good start, but a citation or two would be better.