It is probably easiest to understand this without the scaling factor (the general technique works for an arbitrary lattice). Consider the simple lattice $L = \mathbb{Z}^n$.
One can uniquely decompose $\mathbb{R}^n$ as $\mathbb{Z}^n + [-1/2, 1/2)^n$.
This is done by taking a point $\vec x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ and separating it into its "integer part" (in $\mathbb{Z}^n$) and "fractional part" (in $[-1/2, 1/2)^n$).
This is to say that one can compress $\vec x\in\mathbb{R}^n$ into a point in $\mathbb{Z}^n$, up to bounded error in $[-1/2, 1/2)^n$.
How does this have to do with "compression" though?
It is clearly much easier to store an integer $\vec x\in\mathbb{Z}^n$ than a real number $\vec x\in\mathbb{R}^n$, but so far not in a way that can be made quantitative.
The rest of this post is essentially going to be rephrasing things in a way that can be made quantitative.
The integers used in lattice cryptography are really not arbitrary integers $\mathbb{Z}$, but integers modulo $q$ $\mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z}$. This is somewhat misleading though, and can lead to all sorts of misconceptions --- for example, when one writes $(q/p)$ for $p\nmid q$, one might think this means $q (p^{-1}\mod q)$, when it really should mean something like $\lfloor q/p\rceil$.
This is just to say that the underlying mathematical situation is perhaps not as slick as one might hope/assume.
Anyway, the setup is that we are given $\vec x\in(\mathbb{Z}/q\mathbb{Z})^n$ that we view as being the subset $\{-q/2,-q/2+1\dots,q/2\}^n\subseteq\mathbb{Z}^n$.
There are $q^n$ elements of this subset, so one can represent an element of this subset using $n\log_2 q$ bits.
To compress this, we can replace this subset with a sparser subset.
For example, a very sparse subset we could use is $\{-q/2, 0, q/2\}^n$. In general one will be more careful with the endpoints of this subset and identify $-q/2$ and $q/2$, so this subset will really look like $\{0, q/2\}^n$. This gets us down to $n\log_2 2 = n$ bits. But it can introduce fairly large error, so doesn't work in many situations (quantifying why would require taking a detour to discuss Kyber's error correction).
Anyway, in both cases the subsets take the form of $L / q\mathbb{Z}^n$ for $L\supseteq q\mathbb{Z}^n$ a lattice that is periodic modulo $q$.
One can equivalently write this as $L\cap [-q/2, q/2)^n$.
In the first example the lattice is $L = \mathbb{Z}^n$.
In the second example it is $(q/2)\mathbb{Z}^n$.
One could choose $L$ to be "intermediate" between these two options, for example $(q/2^d)\mathbb{Z}^n$, as Kyber does.
This lets you compress things from $n\log_2 q$ bits to $n\log_2 (q/2^d)$ bits, at the cost of introducing some error.
How do you compute how much error is introduced?
You're solving CVP on the lattice $L := (q/2^d)\mathbb{Z}^n$.
This means you're replacing $\vec x\in\mathbb{Z}^n$ with $\mathsf{CVP}_L(\vec x)$, which leads to error $\vec x - \mathsf{CVP}_L(\vec x)$.
This error will be in the "Voronoi cell" of $L$, which you can compute is contained in $[-(q/2)(1/2^d), (q/2)(1/2^d))^n: = (1/2^d)[-q/2, q/2)^n$, i.e. is really just a scaled copy of the Voronoi cell of $q\mathbb{Z}^n$ (which is $[-q/2, q/2)^n$).