Because it follows a method picked and chosen by the corrector.
> Are there papers arguing for corrections in the other direction?
It doesn't really matter if these corrections sway one way or the other. What matters is that someone decided that the original values weren't good, and proceeded to pick a way to come up with other values by changing the original ones.
I still don't understand your choice of words.
It feels like you jumped into epistemology at the deep end and don't know how to swim in it. One article that pops up frequently around here is "Reality has a surprising amount of detail"
Because it follows a method picked and chosen by the corrector.
> Are there papers arguing for corrections in the other direction?
It doesn't really matter if these corrections sway one way or the other. What matters is that someone decided that the original values weren't good, and proceeded to pick a way to come up with other values by changing the original ones.