user33930: 
Is a quadruple fork (the image above) considered a brilliant move according to Stockfish?
I was just curious to know if Stockfish considers this a brilliant move, but at the same time, I'm not sure how to check this, so it would be great if someone could tell me.

user18809: Stockfish has no concept of what a "brilliant move" actually is. It just gets a position as an input and returns an evaluation number for each of the possible continuations.
All the labels on specific moves are provided by chess.com based on the engine's evaluation and a few other factors. According to chess.com themselves, "brilliant" moves are best moves in a given position that involve some sort of sacrifice. Since this move doesn't, I don't think the move would be classified as brilliant. But stronger players will have more restrictive criteria to be assigned "brilliant moves", so your rating will have an impact on whether your move will be considered brilliant or not.
I wouldn't bother either way. "Brilliant moves" as computers use the term are not a real concept in chess analysis, but rather a marketing strategy used by chess sites to make you want to buy their analysis services. There's also the human definition of "brilliant" (!!) moves used by chess authors that goes something like "a great move that is hard to spot". This of course has the downside of being subjective and not too useful when working with an engine.

33930: <p><a href="https://i.stack.imgur.com/VrFMS.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.stack.imgur.com/VrFMS.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a>
Is a quadruple fork (the image above) considered a brilliant move according to Stockfish?</p>
<p>I was just curious to know if Stockfish considers this a brilliant move, but at the same time, I'm not sure how to check this, so it would be great if someone could tell me.</p>
 18809: <p>Stockfish has no concept of what a &quot;brilliant move&quot; actually is. It just gets a position as an input and returns an evaluation number for each of the possible continuations.</p>
<p>All the labels on specific moves are provided by chess.com based on the engine's evaluation and a few other factors. According to chess.com themselves, &quot;brilliant&quot; moves are best moves in a given position that involve some sort of sacrifice. Since this move doesn't, I don't think the move would be classified as brilliant. But stronger players will have more restrictive criteria to be assigned &quot;brilliant moves&quot;, so your rating will have an impact on whether your move will be considered brilliant or not.</p>
<p>I wouldn't bother either way. &quot;Brilliant moves&quot; as computers use the term are not a real concept in chess analysis, but rather a marketing strategy used by chess sites to make you want to buy their analysis services. There's also the human definition of &quot;brilliant&quot; (!!) moves used by chess authors that goes something like &quot;a great move that is hard to spot&quot;. This of course has the downside of being subjective and not too useful when working with an engine.</p>
