Ahhhh, so using your example (just so I can get the hang of it) :
"If I eat too much junk food, I will be unhealthy"
Converse:If I am unhealthy, it is because I ate junk food
Inverse: If I don't eat much junk food, I will be healthy
Contra positive: If I am healthy, it is because I didn't eat junk food
so that makes IFF converse?
Which of the three is most commonly used for maths questions?
Yep, those are correct.
I don't quite get what you mean when you ask 'So that makes iff converse', can you clarify?
Also, in HSC Mathematics problems, it is usually the original conditional statement that you'll need an understanding of. Maybe a bit of the biconditional statement too, which I've seen appear in problems.
HOWEVER, I am not 100% sure if the biconditional problems are there because the teacher intended for students to prove both directions (or proving one direction only using the 'snowplough'), or because it's just there to sound fancy without the realisation of what it means.
The reason why I addressed this is because in my experience of marking and observing students (and some teachers too!), I've noticed that a lot of them seem to assume that A --> B automatically implies that B --> A. In other words, they assume that the condition is biconditional when in fact it isn't.
For example, f''(A) = 0 is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for a point of inflexion. A common misconception is that f''(A) implies a point of inflexion at x=A.
Another common mistake is if the question says "Prove that if A, then B" and students go ahead and prove that if B, then A instead.