  For current state-of-the-art DPLL SAT-solvers the two main bottlenecks are
the amounts of time and memory used. In proof complexity, these resources
correspond to the length and space of resolution proofs. There has been a long
line of research investigating these proof complexity measures, but while
strong results have been established for length, our understanding of space and
how it relates to length has remained quite poor. In particular, the question
whether resolution proofs can be optimized for length and space simultaneously,
or whether there are trade-offs between these two measures, has remained
essentially open.
  In this paper, we remedy this situation by proving a host of length-space
trade-off results for resolution. Our collection of trade-offs cover almost the
whole range of values for the space complexity of formulas, and most of the
trade-offs are superpolynomial or even exponential and essentially tight. Using
similar techniques, we show that these trade-offs in fact extend to the
exponentially stronger k-DNF resolution proof systems, which operate with
formulas in disjunctive normal form with terms of bounded arity k. We also
answer the open question whether the k-DNF resolution systems form a strict
hierarchy with respect to space in the affirmative.
  Our key technical contribution is the following, somewhat surprising,
theorem: Any CNF formula F can be transformed by simple variable substitution
into a new formula F' such that if F has the right properties, F' can be proven
in essentially the same length as F, whereas on the other hand the minimal
number of lines one needs to keep in memory simultaneously in any proof of F'
is lower-bounded by the minimal number of variables needed simultaneously in
any proof of F. Applying this theorem to so-called pebbling formulas defined in
terms of pebble games on directed acyclic graphs, we obtain our results.
