Is it known whether Todorcevic's Open Coloring Axiom implies $2^{\aleph\_0}=\aleph\_2$?


The only consistency proofs for OCA that I know are the following:


1) PFA implies OCA (and also $2^{\aleph\_0}=\aleph\_2$).


2) Constructing a finite support ccc iteration of length $\omega\_2$ starting from a model satisfying CH. (CH at intermediate stages is needed to ensure the ccc of the forcing notions, so we end with $2^{\aleph\_0}=\aleph\_2$).


3) Starting from a model of OCA and forcing with a Suslin tree (which does not add reals).


On the other hand, I know that MA+OCA imply $2^{\aleph\_0}=\aleph\_2$, as well as OCA plus the Abraham-Rubin-Shelah version of OCA.


The last fact is proved in


Moore, J.T. *Open colorings, the continuum, and the second uncountable cardinal,* Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 130 (2002), n 9, pp. 2753-2759.


where it is also asked whether OCA implies $2^{\aleph\_0}=\aleph\_2$. So my question is if this question has been answered since 2002.



Does OCA imply $2^{\aleph_0}=\aleph_2$?
Whether $OCA$ implies $2^{\aleph\_0}=\aleph\_2$ appears as problem 7.2 in J.T. Moore´s [The Proper Forcing Axiom](http://www.math.cornell.edu/~justin/Ftp/ICM.pdf) in the Proceedings of the ICM, 2010. 
Apparently it was still open by the end of 2012 according to T. Yorioka´s [abstract](http://settheory.mathtalks.org/speaker/teruyuki-yorioka/) for the Fields Institute Set Theory seminar.


